From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 1 02:58:20 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id CAA17815; Fri, 1 Apr 1994 02:58:20 GMT Received: from cs.utexas.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id SAA17809; Thu, 31 Mar 1994 18:58:11 -0800 Received: from im4u.cs.utexas.edu by cs.utexas.edu (5.64/1.25/mx-relay) with SMTP id AA08039; Thu, 31 Mar 94 20:58:30 -0600 Message-Id: <9404010258.AA17262@im4u.cs.utexas.edu> Received: by im4u.cs.utexas.edu (5.64/1.42/uucp) id AA17262; Thu, 31 Mar 94 20:58:38 -0600 Subject: Config Question... To: list-managers@greatcircle.com (list managers) Date: Thu, 31 Mar 1994 20:58:36 -0600 (CST) From: "Lance W. Bledsoe" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL20] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 193 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Can anyone tell me how to config my majordomo list so that the address of the "list" is in the *reply* line, and not the sender of the message? Thanks much, Lance Bledsoe lwb@cs.utexas.edu From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 1 03:23:32 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id DAA18036; Fri, 1 Apr 1994 03:23:32 GMT Received: from cs.utexas.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id TAA18029; Thu, 31 Mar 1994 19:23:03 -0800 Received: from im4u.cs.utexas.edu by cs.utexas.edu (5.64/1.25/mx-relay) with SMTP id AA18703; Thu, 31 Mar 94 21:22:35 -0600 Received: from chinaca by im4u.cs.utexas.edu (5.64/1.42/uucp) with UUCP id AA18429; Thu, 31 Mar 94 21:22:23 -0600 Received: from localhost by chinacat.unicom.com (smail3.1.28.1) id m0pmX4e-0002jMC; Thu, 31 Mar 94 18:27 CST Message-Id: From: chip@chinacat.unicom.com (Chip Rosenthal) Subject: the vultures have landed To: list-managers@greatcircle.com (The List-Managers Mailing List) Date: Thu, 31 Mar 1994 18:27:00 +6600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 998 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I just started up a mailing list to discuss the music of singer/songwriter John Hiatt. Just today, I received an email message from a music publisher implying all sorts of grave and rude threats to me if there are any copyright violations on the list. (Which, by coincidence, I addressed to the list readers just the other day.) I'm wondering if there is a flock of vultures out there, watching us, and waiting to swoop down as was done to me. Or am I the lucky one? Please note this is NOT a question about copyright law. (Nor do I want to engage in a discussion of legal culpability. That's a thread that would generate reams of discussion from people wholly unqualified to answer.) This is a question of common courtesy. I don't appreciate formal and threatening messages in the total absence of any wrongdoing. -- Chip Rosenthal 512-447-0577 | I figure the odds be fifty-fifty Unicom Systems Development | I just might have some thing to say. | -FZ From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 1 04:16:07 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id EAA18281; Fri, 1 Apr 1994 04:16:07 GMT Received: from mordor.cs.du.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id UAA18275; Thu, 31 Mar 1994 20:15:57 -0800 Received: from nyx10.cs.du.edu by mordor.cs.du.edu with SMTP id AA11074 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Thu, 31 Mar 1994 21:13:01 -0700 Received: by nyx10.cs.du.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20113; Thu, 31 Mar 94 21:14:08 MST From: rnovak@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Robert Novak) Message-Id: <9404010414.AA20113@nyx10.cs.du.edu> X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University of Denver. The University has neither control over nor responsibility for the opinions or correct identity of users. Subject: Re: the vultures have landed To: chip@chinacat.unicom.com (Chip Rosenthal) Date: Thu, 31 Mar 1994 21:14:08 -0700 (MST) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: from "Chip Rosenthal" at Mar 31, 94 06:27:00 pm Reply-To: rnovak@nyx.cs.du.edu X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1611 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk "Chip Rosenthal" says something like: > > I just started up a mailing list to discuss the music of singer/songwriter > John Hiatt. Just today, I received an email message from a music > publisher implying all sorts of grave and rude threats to me if there > are any copyright violations on the list. (Which, by coincidence, I > addressed to the list readers just the other day.) > > I'm wondering if there is a flock of vultures out there, watching us, and > waiting to swoop down as was done to me. Or am I the lucky one? Hmmm... I've never had such a threat even with several musical lists at my fingertips. This sort of a post, from what you've said about it, may be founded from the publisher's perspective. There's no reason to be rude, unless you posted something along the lines of "everybody violate as many of Hiatt's publisher's copyrights as you can as often as you can," which I'll guess you didn't. Just don't tell them that FTP exists :-) One thing you might do is have your list members express displeasure politely to the publisher, or just do so yourself and mention that a lot of Hiatt fans or potential Hiatt fans may have their image of the performer tainted by this publisher's comments and the aftermath. Good luck.... don't let it bug you too much. Robert -- Robert Novak (rnovak@nyx.cs.du.edu) . Manager: tiffany, perfect-beat, slade, "You get elaborate with your lies, . tiger, galaxy, gpdg, galaxy variants Computer dreams slip through your . GM: galaxy, g/2, galactica, blind eyes / Baby you like to be the king of paradise / So sweet and ruthless." -TD From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 1 23:16:06 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id XAA23793; Fri, 1 Apr 1994 23:16:06 GMT Received: from skigo.graphics.cornell.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id PAA23787; Fri, 1 Apr 1994 15:15:49 -0800 Received: by skigo.graphics.cornell.edu (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA08168; Fri, 1 Apr 1994 18:16:13 -0500 Message-Id: <9404012316.AA08168@skigo.graphics.cornell.edu> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Reply-To and IRIX Date: Fri, 01 Apr 94 18:16:12 -0500 From: Mitch Collinsworth X-Mts: smtp Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Gang, I'm curious if anyone else has encountered this curious behavior with IRIX. I do not have an SGI system at my disposal for testing and the situation seems so bizarre that I find it hard to believe. I recently had an issue of the digest version of one of my lists bounced back from an SGI system because the user had messed up the protections on his mailbox so that sendmail couldn't write to it. Normally no big deal, he just misses an issue of the digest, right? Well in this case his sendmail bounced the digest to the Reply-To: address instead of (or possibly in addition) the Errors-To: or Return-Path: address. Errors-To: and Return-Path: both point to the list manager, Reply-To: points to the list posting address! So of course the bounced digest went straight back out to everyone on the non-digest version of the list, and into the beginning of the next issue of the digest. (Fortunately the next digest was small enough that the combined size of the two digests was smaller than the trigger size that causes the digest program to immediately send out a new issue instead of waiting for the next cron run. If it had been bigger a mail loop of repeating digests would have ensued!) Of course as soon as I realized what had happened I dropped the subscriber and requested that he either fix his sendmail or subscribe from a different system, *without* a .forward back to the offending system! In all the time I've been running my lists this is the first time I have seen a sendmail do something this stupid. (Not to say I haven't seen stupid, only that the others pale by comparison.) The system's login banner says: IRIX System V.3 (stereosgi) ... and the subscriber claims it's running out-of-the-box sendmail with the only config changes being to define the domain and forwarder addresses. He also claims to have run some tests and verified that his system sends bounces to both the Reply-To: and Errors-To: addresses. Since I don't know IRIX, I have no idea how recent/ancient this version is, but I am truly amazed that a vendor would ship a sendmail with this behavior. Can anyone confirm or deny this as out-of-the-box behavior? -Mitch From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 2 01:23:18 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id BAA24201; Sat, 2 Apr 1994 01:23:18 GMT Received: from unpc.queernet.org by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id RAA24195; Fri, 1 Apr 1994 17:23:10 -0800 Received: by unpc.queernet.org (Smail3.1.28.1 #10) id m0pmuSb-000MWWC; Fri, 1 Apr 94 17:25 PST Message-Id: Date: Fri, 1 Apr 94 17:19 PST From: rogerk@queernet.org (Roger B.A. Klorese) To: mkc@graphics.cornell.edu Subject: Re: Reply-To and IRIX In-Reply-To: <9404012316.AA08168@skigo.graphics.cornell.edu> Organization: QueerNet Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In article <9404012316.AA08168@skigo.graphics.cornell.edu> you write: >Well in this case his sendmail bounced the digest to the Reply-To: >address instead of (or possibly in addition) the Errors-To: or >Return-Path: address. Actually, it should send the error to the envelope From_ address; what's that set to? -- ROGER B.A. KLORESE rogerk@QueerNet.ORG 2215-R Market Street #576 San Francisco, CA 94114 +1 415 ALL-ARFF "There is only one real blasphemy: the refusal of joy." -- Paul Rudnick From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 4 15:04:18 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id PAA05690; Mon, 4 Apr 1994 15:04:18 GMT Received: from skigo.graphics.cornell.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id IAA05684; Mon, 4 Apr 1994 08:04:11 -0700 Received: by skigo.graphics.cornell.edu (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA10630; Mon, 4 Apr 1994 11:03:09 -0400 Message-Id: <9404041503.AA10630@skigo.graphics.cornell.edu> To: rogerk@queernet.org (Roger B.A. Klorese) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Reply-To and IRIX In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 01 Apr 94 17:19:00 PST." Date: Mon, 04 Apr 94 11:03:08 -0400 From: Mitch Collinsworth X-Mts: smtp Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >>Well in this case his sendmail bounced the digest to the Reply-To: >>address instead of (or possibly in addition) the Errors-To: or >>Return-Path: address. > >Actually, it should send the error to the envelope From_ address; >what's that set to? Agreed. It's set the same as Errors-To: - to the list manager. The question isn't really about that, though. It's about the bounce to the Reply-To: address. -Mitch From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 5 19:31:39 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id TAA00789; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 19:31:39 GMT Received: from CVI.HAHNEMANN.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id MAA00783; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 12:31:27 -0700 Received: by cvi.hahnemann.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) id 20120; Tue, 05 Apr 1994 15:29:39 EDT Date: Tue, 05 Apr 1994 15:29:35 EDT From: "Anthony J. Rzepela" To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-ID: <0097C821.0C986920.20120@cvi.hahnemann.edu> Subject: AOL flexing some muscle (USENET posting) Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk With all the brouhaha about AOL a while back, and the rather cavalier attitude some people had towards AOL's ability to do anything, I forward to the list the following tidbit from USENET, posted in news.admin.policy,news.admin, and alt.internet. If this has come up on ListManagers, sorry. (I get the digest, not the immediate list.) If not, uh, enjoy. :-/ ================================begin From: dtynan@philby.ilo.dec.com (Dermot Tynan) Newsgroups: news.admin.policy,news.admin,alt.internet Subject: AOL Hassles (let the flame-wars begin)... Date: 5 Apr 1994 17:09:32 GMT Organization: Claddagh Films Limited Lines: 60 Message-ID: <2ns60c$5kb@decuk.uvo.dec.com> OK, so this probably isn't the place to post this, so feel free to cross-post it (and any replies) elsewhere. I'd also appreciate a quick mail message from someone saying they've seen this posting because I'm not convinced the NNTP stuff is working. Anyway... Scott Dorsey (of Filmmakers Mailing List fame) has just been slimed big time by America Online (AOL). He wrote to them to ask that they educate their users better on how to subscribe to mailing lists, and Netiquette in general. He was receiving tons of SUBSCRIBE requests to the mailing list, by people who had no clue what it was or why they should be interested in it. Usually, after a day or two, the subscribers would then ask to be dropped, again mailing directly to the list instead of to the admin address. Most had never seen the standard net documents and were completely ignorant concerning protocol or etiquette. AOL wrote to Scotts' senior management and spuriously claimed he was forging AOL mail and using Government equipment for non-Government purposes. He has now been told to shut down the mailing list. As one of the original creators of the mailing list, I have come to depend on it as an invaluable resource for independent film making. Now, it has been yanked by an organization which seems to have no respect for net.tradition. I am disheartened to see such a proliferation of organizations such as AOL which take advantage of the facilities provided by the net at large, charge money to their subscribers for using such facilities, and then in the face of all that, create trouble and work for people volunteering their time and efforts to keep the whole system afloat. I for one have had enough. I intend to write to AOL and complain vehemently. I also intend to educate their users concerning the atrocities committed in their name. This cannot go on. This is not a playground for juveniles or their incompetent administrators. The net, after all, is anarchistic in nature. If enough people are annoyed at the shoddy (or shady) business practices of one organization, we should be able to do something about it. I appeal to other people, in similar circumstances to come forward, and to send mail to AOL denouncing that organizations stance, and imploring them to take immediate action. I would also like to hear of possible remedies for renegade outfits such as AOL. I'm sorry if this rankles those of you who connect via AOL, but you should be aware of what your hard-earned dollars are supporting. The apparent reputation of people who use AOL for subscribing is that they are ill-informed kids, given to flaming and hacking. This, I'm convinced is due to poor system administration policies on behalf of AOL. A little educating can go a long way toward alleviating net traffic, and saving the electronic reputations of the countless numbers of people who use the facilities knowledgeably and without creating a ruckus. Whether or not you're an AOL user, I would ask that you write a stern letter to AOL management decrying their recent tactics, and asking that they take more positive steps towards educating their users. Vote please, with your checkbooks, and support an on-line facility with a better corporate culture. - Der -- Dermot Tynan, dtynan@philby.ilo.dec.com Filmmaking: The art of creation in the face of adversity. ================================end From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 5 19:58:44 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id TAA00902; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 19:58:44 GMT Received: from z.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id MAA00896; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 12:58:38 -0700 Received: from localhost (mmorse@localhost) by z.nsf.gov (8.6.4/8.6.4) id PAA11102; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 15:58:14 -0400 Message-Id: <199404051958.PAA11102@z.nsf.gov> From: mmorse@nsf.gov (Michael H. Morse) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 1994 15:58:14 EDT In-Reply-To: "Anthony J. Rzepela" "AOL flexing some muscle (USENET posting)" (Apr 5, 3:29pm) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: "Anthony J. Rzepela" Subject: Re: AOL flexing some muscle (USENET posting) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > AOL wrote to Scotts' senior management and spuriously claimed he was > forging AOL mail and using Government equipment for non-Government > purposes. I guess I'd have to know more about what the above sentence means before I could pass judgement on this case. On the surface, it doesn't sound like behavior likely to get you a good reception from senior management types. Perhaps if we could see the message Scott sent to AOL, we could judge the appropriateness of the response. --Mike From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 5 20:21:58 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id UAA01076; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 20:21:58 GMT Received: from de5.CTD.ORNL.GOV by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id NAA01070; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 13:21:49 -0700 Received: (from de5@localhost) by de5.CTD.ORNL.GOV (8.6.7/8.6.6) id QAA03456; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 16:21:36 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Apr 1994 16:21:36 -0400 From: Dave Sill Message-Id: <199404052021.QAA03456@de5.CTD.ORNL.GOV> To: mmorse@nsf.gov (Michael H. Morse) Cc: "Anthony J. Rzepela" , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: AOL flexing some muscle (USENET posting) In-Reply-To: <199404051958.PAA11102@z.nsf.gov> References: <199404051958.PAA11102@z.nsf.gov> Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >> AOL wrote to Scotts' senior management and spuriously claimed he was >> forging AOL mail and using Government equipment for non-Government >> purposes. > >I guess I'd have to know more about what the above sentence means >before I could pass judgement on this case. On the surface, it >doesn't sound like behavior likely to get you a good reception from >senior management types. Perhaps if we could see the message Scott >sent to AOL, we could judge the appropriateness of the response. We'd also need to know where Scott works and what their mission is before we could determine whether or not the film-makers list was appropriate for his site. It sure would be cheesy of someone to question the appropriateness of a particular list on a Government system merely because the list manager challenged them to do a better job, *but* we Gov't-equipment-using people need to be sure to use that equipment for the purposes it was funded to accomplish. -- Dave Sill (de5@ornl.gov) I dream of a televisionland where it will be Martin Marietta Energy Systems as hard for a network to expose us to violence Workstation Support as it is for me to tell someone they have spinach on their teeth. --Paula Poundstone URL http://www.dec.com/pub/DEC/DECinfo/html/dsill.html From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 5 20:41:22 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id UAA01204; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 20:41:22 GMT Received: from d.ecc.engr.uky.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id NAA01198; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 13:41:14 -0700 Received: from s.ecc.engr.uky.edu by d.ecc.engr.uky.edu (5.59/25-eef) id AA07672; Tue, 5 Apr 94 16:32:34 EDT Received: by s.ecc.engr.uky.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01092; Tue, 5 Apr 94 16:31:23 EDT Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 16:31:23 EDT From: morgan@engr.uky.edu (Wes Morgan) Message-Id: <9404052031.AA01092@s.ecc.engr.uky.edu> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: AOL flexing some muscle Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Anthony J. Rzepela reposts: >From: dtynan@philby.ilo.dec.com (Dermot Tynan) >Newsgroups: news.admin.policy,news.admin,alt.internet >Subject: AOL Hassles (let the flame-wars begin)... > >[...] >Scott Dorsey (of Filmmakers Mailing List fame) has just been slimed big >time by America Online (AOL). He wrote to them to ask that they >educate their users better on how to subscribe to mailing lists, and >Netiquette in general. > >AOL wrote to Scotts' senior management and spuriously claimed he was >forging AOL mail and using Government equipment for non-Government >purposes. >[...remainder deleted...] For starters, we don't know that "AOL management" did this. I've been told (too many times) that "some official at booga.com says," only to find that it's some hacked-off *user* at booga.com. Let's not pull out the tar and feathers until we know "what's what." I will say that, if AOL management is indeed responsible, there is NO excuse for such behavior. >He has now been told to shut down the mailing list. Couldn't we rephrase this problem as "why did the host site take such drastic action after *one* complaint?" I'm not defending AOL - I'm simply saying that we should not allow our concern with the flood of AOL newbies to lead us into assumptions that may be erroneous. I, for one, have contacted AOL management and asked them, point-blank, if this is an accurate report of the situation. If it is, I'll join you in discussing the reaction we should take as list owners. --Wes From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 5 21:40:29 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id VAA01593; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 21:40:29 GMT Received: from Sun.COM by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id OAA01586; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 14:40:20 -0700 Received: from Eng.Sun.COM (zigzag.Eng.Sun.COM) by Sun.COM (sun-barr.Sun.COM) id AA21630; Tue, 5 Apr 94 14:40:16 PDT Received: from cleo.Eng.Sun.COM by Eng.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA26774; Tue, 5 Apr 94 14:39:25 PDT Received: by cleo.Eng.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA18190; Tue, 5 Apr 94 14:35:08 PDT Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 14:35:08 PDT From: Teshager.Tesfaye@Eng.Sun.COM (T2) Message-Id: <9404052135.AA18190@cleo.Eng.Sun.COM> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: is the following possible Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Could majordomo be setup as follows in such a way that a the command "who list" for members of a closed list is suppressed? Thanks. -T2 From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 5 22:07:50 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id WAA01731; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 22:07:50 GMT Received: from emory.mathcs.emory.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id PAA01724; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 15:07:39 -0700 Received: from toolz.UUCP by emory.mathcs.emory.edu (5.65/Emory_mathcs.3.4.19) via UUCP id AA06083 ; Tue, 5 Apr 94 18:07:33 -0400 Received: by toolz (5.65/1.35) id AA24936; Tue, 5 Apr 94 17:45:28 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 17:45:28 -0400 From: todd%toolz.UUCP@mathcs.emory.edu (Todd Merriman) Message-Id: <9404052145.AA24936@toolz> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: AOL flexing some muscle (USENET posting) Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >With all the brouhaha about AOL a while >back... It you think the AOL situation with mailing lists is bad, just wait til the AOL subscribers start posting News! That's right, AOL is introducing Usenet News within a few weeks, according to a letter from the AOL president to the subscribers (I am one). | Todd Merriman - Software Toolz, Inc. +1 404 889 8264 / Maintainer of the | 8030 Pooles Mill Dr., Ball Ground, GA 30107 / Software Entrepreneur's | todd@toolz.atl.ga.us / Mailing List Work flows toward the competent until they are submerged From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 5 22:07:58 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id WAA01737; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 22:07:58 GMT Received: from urth.acsu.buffalo.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id PAA01726; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 15:07:47 -0700 Received: from localhost (pjg@localhost) by urth (8.6.8/8.6.4) with SMTP id SAA14927 for ; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 18:07:39 -0400 Message-Id: <199404052207.SAA14927@urth.acsu.buffalo.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: urth.acsu.buffalo.edu: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: is the following possible In-reply-to: A message of "Tue, 05 Apr 1994 14:35:08 PDT." <9404052135.AA18190@cleo.Eng.Sun.COM> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 05 Apr 1994 18:07:39 -0400 From: Paul Graham Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk i was interested in this myself so i added ``anon'' to the list types. perhaps something like this could be added to the standard distribution. -------- T2 writes: Could majordomo be setup as follows in such a way that a the command "who list" for members of a closed list is suppressed? ------------------- -- paul From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 5 22:39:27 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id WAA01891; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 22:39:27 GMT Received: from news.std.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id PAA01885; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 15:39:19 -0700 Received: from world.std.com by news.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.1) id AA21985; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 18:39:13 -0400 Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA08571; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 18:39:04 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Apr 1994 18:39:04 -0400 (EDT) From: Sharon Shea Subject: Re: AOL flexing some muscle (USENET posting) To: Todd Merriman Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9404052145.AA24936@toolz> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > >With all the brouhaha about AOL a while > >back... > > It you think the AOL situation with mailing lists is bad, > just wait til the AOL subscribers start posting News! > That's right, AOL is introducing Usenet News within a few > weeks, according to a letter from the AOL president to > the subscribers (I am one). > Sorry to bring up a subject you may have already talked out, but I am new to the list and am wondering about the comments about AOL and mailing lists. I did check in there, and noticed one of my lists is mentioned. I've had some new subscribers as a result, but it hasn't been a problem (so far). I posted this one on the 'new lists' list, so I was already out there. There's some other lists I have though, that could have a problem with that much publicity. If this list has already had enough talk on the topic, private posts to me would be apprecaited. Thanks. -Sharon From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 5 22:57:47 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id WAA02044; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 22:57:47 GMT Received: from summit.novell.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id OAA01499; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 14:26:22 -0700 Date: Tue, 5 Apr 94 17:25 EDT Message-ID: <9404051725.AA05986@summit.novell.com> From: mingus@summit.novell.com (Marcel-Franck Simon) To: rzepela@cvi.hahnemann.edu ("Anthony J. Rzepela"), list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Received: from summit by summit.novell.com; Tue, 5 Apr 94 17:25 EDT Subject: Re: AOL flexing some muscle (USENET posting) Content-Length: 1815 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk My experience with AOL, their users and my mailing list has been thus: - Received a flood of subscribe requests by people who were completely ignorant of the list's subscribe protocol. - Contacted postmaster@aol.com and asked that s/he rectify the situation - Received no answer over a period of a couple months - Got annoyed - List-Managers list went through a what-to-do-about-clueless-AOL-subscribers discussion, during which I relayed the above - Heard comments from people who *had* gotten response from postmaster@aol.com - Wrote postmaster@aol.com again - Received a *very* cooperative response within one day, explaining that things were just getting setup to deal with problems like mine, and saying that my mail had been forwarded to listmaster@aol.com - Received an *equally* cooperative response from the listmaster within 1-2 days after that. Sent this person a couple messages explaining the process I wanted their subscribers to follow - Haven't had a problem with AOL people subscribing to my list, since. Several of them have turned out to be excellent contributors. I conclude that the problem was one of ignorance compounded by miscommunication. AOL deserves responsibility for rushing their people onto the Internet without teaching them the rules of the road, so to speak; but IMO they are doing the right thing to correct the situation. This message does not jibe at all with my own situation, and I'd want to hear a lot more details, including AOL's version of the story, before blasting away at them. Remember, AOL makes money by (a) getting more subscribers and (b) these subscribers being connected for good long periods of time. I would think they would *want* their people to subscribe to as many lists as possible, increasing the fees they pay AOL.... Marcel From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 5 23:01:49 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id XAA02115; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 23:01:49 GMT Received: from mycroft.GreatCircle.COM by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id QAA02108; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 16:01:43 -0700 Message-Id: <199404052301.QAA02108@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: Teshager.Tesfaye@Eng.Sun.COM (T2) cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: is the following possible In-reply-to: Your message of Tue, 5 Apr 94 14:35:08 PDT Date: Tue, 05 Apr 1994 16:01:42 -0700 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Teshager.Tesfaye@Eng.Sun.COM (T2) writes: # # Could majordomo be setup as follows in such a way that # a the command "who list" for members of a closed list # is suppressed? # # Thanks. # -T2 First, questions about specific mailing list packages should be referred to the support lists for those packages (in the case of Majordomo, that's Majordomo-Users@GreatCircle.COM), not to the the List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM mailing list. List-Managers is for more general discussions of policy, procedure, experiences, and so forth. To answer your question: yes, sort of. In the current release of Majordomo, if you mark the list "private", then only members of the list can see who else is on the list. In the next release (which is about to go out for beta test), you'll be able to turn this off entirely (but beware that it's usually pretty easy to get the same info from Sendmail). -Brent -- Brent Chapman | Great Circle Associates | Call or email for info about Brent@GreatCircle.COM | 1057 West Dana Street | upcoming Internet Security +1 415 962 0841 | Mountain View, CA 94041 | Firewalls Tutorial dates From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 5 23:19:39 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id XAA02341; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 23:19:39 GMT Received: from mycroft.GreatCircle.COM by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id QAA02331; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 16:19:31 -0700 Message-Id: <199404052319.QAA02331@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: AOL flexing some muscle (USENET posting) In-reply-to: Your message of Tue, 5 Apr 1994 15:58:14 EDT Date: Tue, 05 Apr 1994 16:19:29 -0700 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk mmorse@nsf.gov (Michael H. Morse) writes: # # > AOL wrote to Scotts' senior management and spuriously claimed he was # > forging AOL mail and using Government equipment for non-Government # > purposes. # # I guess I'd have to know more about what the above sentence means # before I could pass judgement on this case. On the surface, it # doesn't sound like behavior likely to get you a good reception from # senior management types. Perhaps if we could see the message Scott # sent to AOL, we could judge the appropriateness of the response. There's another consideration here: just because a machine has a .GOV address, don't assume it's a government machine. The machines at GreatCircle.COM, for instance, are also known as CAP.GOV (Civil Air Patrol). They are most definitely MY machines, though; I bought them, I own them, I've never received a dime from the government for the CAP.GOV stuff (it's part of the volunteer work that I do with CAP), and they don't have ANY say in what "appropriate use" of these machines is. -Brent -- Brent Chapman | Great Circle Associates | Call or email for info about Brent@GreatCircle.COM | 1057 West Dana Street | upcoming Internet Security +1 415 962 0841 | Mountain View, CA 94041 | Firewalls Tutorial dates From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 5 23:47:12 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id XAA02817; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 23:47:12 GMT Received: from vector.casti.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id QAA02811; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 16:47:04 -0700 Received: by vector.casti.com (NX5.67d/5.931230) id AA17511; Tue, 5 Apr 94 19:44:38 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Apr 1994 19:42:57 -0400 (EDT) From: David Casti Subject: Re: AOL flexing some muscle (USENET posting) To: Todd Merriman Cc: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9404052145.AA24936@toolz> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > It you think the AOL situation with mailing lists is bad, > just wait til the AOL subscribers start posting News! ^^^^^ > That's right, AOL is introducing Usenet News within a few > weeks, according to a letter from the AOL president to > the subscribers (I am one). Start? It's been available for at least three weeks. Use the keyword "internet" or "newsgroups". David. From list-managers-owner Tue Apr 5 17:03:43 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id XAA02779; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 23:45:53 GMT Received: from vector.casti.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id QAA02773; Tue, 5 Apr 1994 16:45:45 -0700 Received: by vector.casti.com (NX5.67d/5.931230) id AA17495; Tue, 5 Apr 94 19:42:49 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Apr 1994 19:41:30 -0400 (EDT) From: David Casti Subject: Re: is the following possible To: T2 Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <9404052135.AA18190@cleo.Eng.Sun.COM> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Tue, 5 Apr 1994, T2 wrote: > Could majordomo be setup as follows in such a way that > a the command "who list" for members of a closed list > is suppressed? Sure; just change the command in the perl script and change the info message to tell people who isn't available. David. From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 6 12:40:37 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id MAA04042; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 12:40:37 GMT Received: from FSM-1.PICA.ARMY.MIL by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id FAA04036; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 05:40:29 -0700 Date: Wed, 6 Apr 94 8:40:32 EDT From: Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: AOL flexing some muscle (USENET posting) Organization: Electric Armts Div, US Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ Message-ID: <9404060840.aa13768@fsm-1.pica.army.mil> Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk todd@toolz.atl.ga.us wrote: >>With all the brouhaha about AOL a while >>back... > >It you think the AOL situation with mailing lists is bad, >just wait til the AOL subscribers start posting News! >That's right, AOL is introducing Usenet News within a few >weeks, according to a letter from the AOL president to >the subscribers (I am one). Hmmm. They've already been doing so for a month now. WRT the original post, I find it quite unlikely that the sysadmins at AOL did as described. I sent a note off to postmaster enquiring about the way they handle mailing lists there, since I'd been getting a whole bunch of subscribes followed 3 days later by corresponding unsubscribes. PM forwarded my note to a person whose job it is to maintain a database of internet mailing lists for users on AOL. That person solicited me for up-to-date descriptions of my mailing lists, sub/unsub procedures, etc. Not the story I've seen presented here at all... Tom Coradeschi, Info-LabVIEW List Maintainer From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 6 14:02:30 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id OAA04411; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 14:02:30 GMT Received: from intercon.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id HAA04405; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 07:02:21 -0700 Received: from localhost by intercon.com (Sendmail 8.6.5/940209.RS) id KAA01869; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 10:02:11 -0400 Date: Wed, 6 Apr 1994 10:02:11 -0400 From: jailbait@intercon.com (Jailbait) Message-Id: <199404061402.KAA01869@intercon.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: AOL flexing some muscle (USENET posting) Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Isn't the AOL List manager on this list? If not, did anyone keep the posting he made a while ago saying 'Talk to me if you have problems'? JB From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 6 14:22:15 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id OAA04536; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 14:22:15 GMT Received: from CVI.HAHNEMANN.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id HAA04523; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 07:21:58 -0700 Received: by cvi.hahnemann.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) id 20259; Wed, 06 Apr 1994 10:20:10 EDT Date: Wed, 06 Apr 1994 10:20:08 EDT From: "Anthony J. Rzepela" To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-ID: <0097C8BE.FC0D98C0.20259@cvi.hahnemann.edu> Subject: Gee, why are LM's tired of AOLers? Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I'm forwarding a copy of email I got from someone at AOL calling himself a "System Administrator". The message refers to me in the third person, and seems to be addressed to the List Managers list as a whole, so I really don't think this is a matter of forwarding private email. I hope someone besides me appreciates the irony of an AOL sys admin who doesn't now how to get a reply to a list message to the appropriate place, and the methodology described in the following letter used to finger the "culprit". My own comment? If I'm EVER a defendant in a criminal case, I want all AOL people excluded. =====================================begin From: MX%"pmdatropos@aol.com" 5-APR-1994 17:01:32.58 Subj: Re: AOL flexing some muscle (... Return-Path: Received: from mailgate.prod.aol.net by CVI.HAHNEMANN.EDU (MX V3.3 VAX) with SMTP; Tue, 05 Apr 1994 16:32:19 EDT Received: by mailgate.prod.aol.net (1.37.109.4/16.2) id AA17711; Tue, 5 Apr 94 16:31:51 -0400 From: pmdatropos@aol.com X-Mailer: America Online Mailer Sender: "pmdatropos" Message-ID: <9404051631.tn443803@aol.com> To: rzepela@cvi.hahnemann.edu Date: Tue, 05 Apr 94 16:31:49 EDT Subject: Re: AOL flexing some muscle (... "Anthony J. Rzepela" forwarded some mail regarding action taken against Scott Dorsey. Since I was involved in the situation, I feel it's only appropriate that the *other side* of the story be told. A few weeks ago, I received a bounced e-mail informing me that a news article I allegedly posted to several newsgroups was being returned as a result of bad headers. Since I had never written any such article, I was obviously surprised (and concerned). After examining the headers of the article, we determined a list of sites from which the forgery could conceivably have come. We attempted to contact all of the postmasters at those sites and ascertain what had, indeed, happened. Mr Dorsey was one of the respondants. Postmasters at the other sites responded in such a fashion that we were reasonably certain the forgery had not arisen from their machines. This left only Mr Dorsey's machine, in the NASA domain. Mind you, up til this point I had no idea who Mr Dorsey was; claims that any action taken against him were motivated by corporate or personal vendetta are simply false. Our next step involved contacting the postmaster at the NASA machine (and cc:ing their admin. contact) and alerting them to the possibility that the integrity of their machine had been compromised. Again, at NO TIME was there an effort to target Mr. Dorsey, or to allege that he was the source of the forgery. As far as I am concerned, there has never been any hard evidence that he was the cause -- however, it *did* appear that the most likely path of propagation was from Mr. Dorsey's computer. We recently received mail from NASA indicating that in their opinion the case was closed and that they would whatever action, if any, they deemed appropriate. To date, I have received several pieces of private e-mail regarding the USENET article which I allegedly wrote; in each case I have asked the sender to identify the place where the article appeared (only one has responded). I repeat that this article did *not* originate from me or my computer. Although the letter forwarded by Mr Rzepela leaves me upset, I can and do understand the underlying reason for it. I cannot emphasize enough that there has never been any intent to cause harm to Mr. Dorsey. If action was taken against him by NASA, I can only conclude that they deemed it appropriate. Regards, David B. O'Donnell (PMDAtropos@aol.com) System Administrator, America Online, Inc. ==========================================================end From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 6 14:34:26 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id OAA04614; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 14:34:26 GMT Received: from z.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id HAA04607; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 07:34:10 -0700 Received: from localhost (mmorse@localhost) by z.nsf.gov (8.6.4/8.6.4) id KAA11798 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 10:33:16 -0400 Message-Id: <199404061433.KAA11798@z.nsf.gov> From: mmorse@nsf.gov (Michael H. Morse) Date: Wed, 6 Apr 1994 10:33:16 EDT In-Reply-To: "Anthony J. Rzepela" "AOL flexing some muscle (USENET posting)" (Apr 5, 3:29pm) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Where bounces go to Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Am I correct in my understanding that mailers should be sending bounces to the From address from the envelope (or to be more precise, the address specified in the MAIL FROM: line in the SMTP interchange)? Am I also correct in my understanding that this address is the one displayed on most Unix sendmail-based systems in the "From" line that delimits mail messages? Assuming I'm correct, I am considering not allowing folks to subscribe to my lists if their mailer doesn't send errors back to the correct address. (I have little tolerance for bounces.) I would just build up, manually, a list of host names that don't follow the spec. If someone with one of the hostnames tried to subscribe, they'd get back a message saying something like, "I know it's probably not your fault, but we don't allow non-RFC compliant mailers to use our lists. Please have your postmaster contact ______ when it's fixed, blah, blah, blah." Questions: Has anyone taken this extreme step? What are the possible reprecussions. --Mike From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 6 15:01:10 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id PAA04752; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 15:01:10 GMT Received: from skigo.graphics.cornell.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id IAA04746; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 08:01:03 -0700 Received: by skigo.graphics.cornell.edu (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA02192; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 11:00:58 -0400 Message-Id: <9404061500.AA02192@skigo.graphics.cornell.edu> To: mmorse@nsf.gov (Michael H. Morse) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Where bounces go to In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 06 Apr 94 10:33:16 EDT." <199404061433.KAA11798@z.nsf.gov> Date: Wed, 06 Apr 94 11:00:58 -0400 From: Mitch Collinsworth X-Mts: smtp Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk My reading of the RFCs agrees with yours and yes, in response to the situation I outlined last week with the SGI machine sending bounces to the Reply-To: address, I have taken just the "extreme" step you suggest. This is the 2nd time I've had to bounce someone. In both cases my stated position is that I have only one requirement for people who subscribe to my lists and that is that their mailbox reside on a system that conforms to the accepted internet standards. If it does not and puts the list at risk, you're out. Find your system or get a mailbox on a different one. (Note that if the person resubscribes with another address, you still gotta check that he hasn't .forward-ed mail from there back to the offending system.) In last week's incident the user put up a lengthy argument, which only ceased when I trotted out the RFCs and pointed him to specific sections. At that point he found a new mailbox AND went after SGI customer support to find out how to fix his sendmail. I too wondered about possible repercussions, but I decided I could safely stand on the RFCs if someone ever tried to get nasty about it. -Mitch From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 6 17:59:21 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id RAA06443; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 17:59:21 GMT Received: from z.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id KAA06437; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 10:59:14 -0700 Received: from localhost (mmorse@localhost) by z.nsf.gov (8.6.4/8.6.4) id NAA12029 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 13:59:00 -0400 Message-Id: <199404061759.NAA12029@z.nsf.gov> From: mmorse@nsf.gov (Michael H. Morse) Date: Wed, 6 Apr 1994 13:59:00 EDT In-Reply-To: "Anthony J. Rzepela" "Gee, why are LM's tired of AOLers?" (Apr 6, 10:20am) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Gee, why are LM's tired of AOLers? Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I think I would change your subject to "why are LM's so sensitive"? FTF communication between human beings is difficult enough. E-mail, lacking instantaneous response and non-verbal clues is much worse. I think David B. O'Donnell's message is quite reasonable, clear, and polite. What more do you want from the guy??? Other comments on your message follow. --Mike > I'm forwarding a copy of email I got from someone > at AOL calling himself a "System Administrator". This is demeaning in that you are implying he is *not* a system administrator, at least in the way you think of system administrator. Insulting people in e-mail is unlikely to elicit cooperation. If your intention is to insult, then I think that speaks for itself. From list-managers-owner Wed Apr 6 11:38:44 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id SAA06660; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 18:32:04 GMT Received: from wilma.cs.utk.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id LAA06652; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 11:31:49 -0700 Received: from LOCALHOST by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.9c-UTK) id OAA27473; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 14:31:13 -0400 Message-Id: <199404061831.OAA27473@wilma.cs.utk.edu> From: Keith Moore To: mmorse@nsf.gov (Michael H. Morse) cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com, moore@cs.utk.edu Subject: Re: Where bounces go to In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 06 Apr 1994 10:33:16 EDT." <199404061433.KAA11798@z.nsf.gov> Date: Wed, 06 Apr 1994 14:31:12 -0400 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Am I correct in my understanding that mailers should be sending > bounces to the From address from the envelope (or to be more precise, > the address specified in the MAIL FROM: line in the SMTP interchange)? Yes. > Am I also correct in my understanding that this address is the one > displayed on most Unix sendmail-based systems in the "From" > line that delimits mail messages? Usually. However, since some user agents use that field for replies, some delivery agents put a different address in that field. > Assuming I'm correct, I am considering not allowing folks to > subscribe to my lists if their mailer doesn't send errors back to > the correct address. (I have little tolerance for bounces.) I would > just build up, manually, a list of host names that don't follow the > spec. If someone with one of the hostnames tried to subscribe, they'd > get back a message saying something like, "I know it's probably not > your fault, but we don't allow non-RFC compliant mailers to use our > lists. Please have your postmaster contact ______ when it's fixed, > blah, blah, blah." > > Questions: Has anyone taken this extreme step? What are the possible > reprecussions. I take somewhat less extreme measures. When someone wants to subscribe to one of my lists using an address that looks like the name of a sub-list, I first send that person a message asking if the sub-list sets the envelope address properly. If not, I try to help them fix their mailer. I have only occasional problems with bounces going to any of my lists, and the usual culprit is a gateway to a non-Internet mail system which doesn't keep separate header/envelope addresses. Then again, my lists don't reset the From header field, so broken mailers will bounce messages to the sender of the message instead of the list. That's far from ideal, but at least it doesn't trash the entire list. Keith Moore From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 7 00:06:44 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id AAA08897; Thu, 7 Apr 1994 00:06:44 GMT Received: from lobby.ti.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id RAA08890; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 17:06:14 -0700 Received: from itg.ti.com ([128.247.93.50]) by lobby.ti.com with SMTP (5.65c/LAI-3.2) id AA02178; Wed, 6 Apr 1994 19:06:09 -0500 Received: from DSKMGWST.ITG.TI.COM by itg.ti.com (4.1/ITG-1.1) id AA23441; Wed, 6 Apr 94 14:49:06 CDT Message-Id: <9404061949.AA23441@itg.ti.com> From: KRAV.DPCPO004@DSKMGWS1.itg.ti.com (Alan Kravitz) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 1994 14:45 CST To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Commercial Listserv Providers Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I'm looking for some direction and hope that someone on this list can help me. My employer Texas Instruments is sponsoring discussion lists on Internet concerning products we provide to students and educators. Many of you are probably familiar with these products, TI graphing and scientific calculators. We currently sponsor two lists at a Ohio State University (Graph-TI & Calc-TI), but would like to establish a business relationship with a commercial service provider to take over the duties being provided by OSU. The services were looking for include discussion lists (listserv & network news) and an archive for source code from users and TI product information (ftp site). Other services we are interested in obtaining from a service provider include Gopher, Archie, WAIS, WWW for our information. Because our customers are students and educators, we feel that Internet (which is widely available to these groups at no cost to them) is the right mechanism to provide the forum for people to exchange information about our products. Commercial services such as Prodigy, CompuServe, America Online and Delphi could provide these services but most students and educators have told us that they don't access these commercial services. TI does have a presence on the Internet, but for security reasons, we can't host lists and provide anonymous ftp from computing resources on TI's internal network. Therefore, we'd like to locate a service provider who is in the business of providing these kinds of services. Again, any help from list managers would be greatly appreciated. Regards, Alan Kravitz ============================================================================== = Texas Instruments Personal Productivity Products Phone:(214) 917-6395 7800 Banner Drive, MS 3911 FAX: (214) 917-1505 Dallas, Texas 75251 Internet Address: akravitz@lobby.ti.com ============================================================================== = From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 7 14:46:20 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id OAA12240; Thu, 7 Apr 1994 14:46:20 GMT Received: from CVI.HAHNEMANN.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id HAA12234; Thu, 7 Apr 1994 07:45:59 -0700 Received: by cvi.hahnemann.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) id 20593; Thu, 07 Apr 1994 10:44:03 EDT Date: Thu, 07 Apr 1994 10:43:58 EDT From: "Anthony J. Rzepela" To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-ID: <0097C98B.7B3950E0.20593@cvi.hahnemann.edu> Subject: Insults, competence, etc. Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk mmorse@nsf.gov (Michael H. Morse) writes: > I think I would change your subject to "why are LM's so sensitive"? > FTF communication between human beings is difficult enough. E-mail, > lacking instantaneous response and non-verbal clues is much worse. > I think David B. O'Donnell's message is quite reasonable, clear, and > polite. What more do you want from the guy??? 1. I would like his mail to go to the right place? Like the list instead of my mailbox? 2. I would like his followup to somebody else, which also mistakenly came into my mailbox, and which attributed to me some things I NEVER said, to also go to the right place? (No, I'm not forwarding it. If he didn't save a copy, he's fucked.) 3. I would like a little more confidence in the forgery-sniffing talents of someone who can't even manage to handle attributes, send REPLIES to LIST MESSAGES to the LIST, or figure out from standard attribute cues who did (or didn't) say something. 4. I would like to think that before running around screaming "Forgery! Forgery!" the AOL people would have more evidence than how (un)believable they found the performance of the sysadmins when answering questions. > This is demeaning in that you are implying he is *not* a system > administrator, at least in the way you think of system administrator. > Insulting people in e-mail is unlikely to elicit cooperation. The only cooperation I need from him at this point is for him to stop sending me email intended for someone else and misattributing others' prose to me. Of course, his competence at actually sending mail says little about his ability to sniff out and finger forgeries. :) +------ Anthony J. Rzepela rzepela@cvi.hahnemann.edu -----+ | Hahnemann University, Philadelphia (215) 762-7741 | | I do not speak for, or represent, Hahnemann University or AHERF. | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 7 15:12:02 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id PAA12328; Thu, 7 Apr 1994 15:12:02 GMT Received: from snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id IAA12322; Thu, 7 Apr 1994 08:11:53 -0700 Received: by snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (5.64/1.35) id AA22846; Thu, 7 Apr 94 11:11:48 -0400 From: stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (Steve Portigal) Message-Id: <9404071511.AA22846@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca> Subject: bitnet go bye-bye? To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 11:11:46 EDT In-Reply-To: <199404070810.BAA10737@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM>; from "List-Managers-Digest-Owner@GreatCircle.COM" at Apr 7, 94 1:10 am Organization: Your Company Name Here X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At any rate the problem I'm having is with BITNET users on my mailing list. They *all* bounced last night. I'm wondering if there was some sudden shift from BITNET address to the Internet-style equivalents. If so, then I would expect any reader concerned to mail me with new email information. It hasn't happened. Do all BITNET sites have Internet equivalents? Can anyone suggest a painless way of finding them all, or should I just delete 'em all. OR: is this a one-time occurrence perhaps and they'll all be back tomorrow? Ie, I haven't isolated the cause let alone the solution -- +------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Steve Portigal ** User-Interface Dude (looking for work) | | View my M.Sc. thesis online at: http://130.43.3.18/ | | stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca Voice/Fax: (905) 632 6647 | +------------------------------------------------------------------+ From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 7 08:28:52 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id PAA12494; Thu, 7 Apr 1994 15:20:34 GMT Received: from mailgate.prod.aol.net by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id IAA12488; Thu, 7 Apr 1994 08:20:26 -0700 From: pmdatropos@aol.com Received: by mailgate.prod.aol.net (1.37.109.4/16.2) id AA10780; Thu, 7 Apr 94 11:17:43 -0400 X-Mailer: America Online Mailer Message-Id: <9404071117.tn509981@aol.com> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Thu, 07 Apr 94 11:17:43 EDT Subject: Re: Insults, competence, etc. Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk rzepela@cvi.hahnemann.edu writes: [ ... ] >2. I would like his followup to somebody else, which also > mistakenly came into my mailbox, and which attributed > to me some things I NEVER said, to also go to the > right place? (No, I'm not forwarding it. If he didn't > save a copy, he's fucked.) Mr Rzepela only received *carbon-copies* of messages sent to other individuals. My *original* response was to him, this list (which was delayed due to an error on my part; heaven forbid I actually be human and make mistakes), and two other individuals. >3. I would like a little more confidence in the forgery-sniffing > talents of someone who can't even manage to handle attributes, > send REPLIES to LIST MESSAGES to the LIST, or figure out from > standard attribute cues who did (or didn't) say something. >From the original message to List-Managers: Date: Tue, 05 Apr 1994 15:29:35 EDT From: "Anthony J. Rzepela" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Message-Id: <0097C821.0C986920.20120@cvi.hahnemann.edu> Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Subject: AOL flexing some muscle (USENET posting) >4. I would like to think that before running around screaming > "Forgery! Forgery!" the AOL people would have more evidence > than how (un)believable they found the performance of the > sysadmins when answering questions. You are, of course, welcome to believe what you will. We are satisfied that the investigation performed by NASA on its equipment was sufficient. Clearly they must have found evidence which indicated *to them* that something had happened. Our role in this affair was to alert them to a possible security breach at one of their machines. Personally, I don't see what the continuation of this thread has to do with managing mailing lists, so I encourage further discussion to take place in a more appropriate forum. __ David B. O'Donnell (PMDAtropos@aol.com, atropos@aol.net) \/ System Administrator, America Online, Inc. Tel.: +1 703/556-3725 From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 7 15:41:42 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id PAA12615; Thu, 7 Apr 1994 15:41:42 GMT Received: from snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id IAA12609; Thu, 7 Apr 1994 08:41:28 -0700 Received: by snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (5.64/1.35) id AA23210; Thu, 7 Apr 94 11:41:22 -0400 From: stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (Steve Portigal) Message-Id: <9404071541.AA23210@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca> Subject: More on bitnet woes To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 7 Apr 94 11:41:20 EDT Organization: Your Company Name Here X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On May 1, we are told that The old-style e-mail addresses of userid@uoguelph (does not include the .ca) or userid@remotesite.BITNET will no longer work as of May 1st, 1994 I took that to mean that we could not receive mail to our bitnet address (which we don't use) but that we could still send. Perhaps that's not true. Here are all the errors I'm getting: >>> RCPT To: <<< 550 Host 'pucc.BITNET' Unknown 550 name@pucc.bitnet... User unknown of course, the pucc part is quite varied, including a whole range of bitnet sites. I'm still not sure if the problem is something being turned off at Guelph or something "out there" Steve -- +------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Steve Portigal ** User-Interface Dude (looking for work) | | View my M.Sc. thesis online at: http://130.43.3.18/ | | stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca Voice/Fax: (905) 632 6647 | +------------------------------------------------------------------+ From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 7 15:54:43 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id PAA12698; Thu, 7 Apr 1994 15:54:43 GMT Received: from skigo.graphics.cornell.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id IAA12692; Thu, 7 Apr 1994 08:54:34 -0700 Received: by skigo.graphics.cornell.edu (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA03949; Thu, 7 Apr 1994 11:53:20 -0400 Message-Id: <9404071553.AA03949@skigo.graphics.cornell.edu> To: stevep@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca (Steve Portigal) Cc: List-Managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: bitnet go bye-bye? In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 07 Apr 94 11:11:46 EDT." <9404071511.AA22846@snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca> Date: Thu, 07 Apr 94 11:53:20 -0400 From: Mitch Collinsworth X-Mts: smtp Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >At any rate the problem I'm >having is with BITNET users on my mailing list. They *all* bounced last >night. I'm wondering if there was some sudden shift from BITNET >address to the Internet-style equivalents. How does your system route mail to bitnet? If you're not directly connected, then it must be via a gateway. Did you try asking the gateway operator? Bitnet *is* going away in the near future. Cornell, for example, is shooting for a September 1 disconnect. >Do all BITNET sites have >Internet equivalents? Not necessarily, but if they want to stay connected they will soon. >On May 1, we are told that > The old-style e-mail addresses of userid@uoguelph (does not > include the .ca) or userid@remotesite.BITNET will no longer work > as of May 1st, 1994 > >I took that to mean that we could not receive mail to our bitnet >address (which we don't use) but that we could still send. Perhaps >that's not true. Here are all the errors I'm getting: > >>>> RCPT To: ><<< 550 Host 'pucc.BITNET' Unknown >550 name@pucc.bitnet... User unknown > >of course, the pucc part is quite varied, including a whole range >of bitnet sites. > >I'm still not sure if the problem is something being turned off at Guelph >or something "out there" Apparently vm.uoguelph.ca is the gateway you've been using and it's stopped working. Ask them if it's permanent or accidental. If permanent you need to move to a different gateway. -Mitch From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 8 07:46:54 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id HAA17014; Fri, 8 Apr 1994 07:46:54 GMT Received: from Tux.Music.ASU.Edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id AAA17008; Fri, 8 Apr 1994 00:46:47 -0700 From: Ben.Goren@asu.edu Received: from Tux.Music.ASU.Edu by Tux.Music.ASU.Edu (5.64/A/UX-3.00) id AA00724; Thu, 7 Apr 94 09:55:20 MST Message-Id: <9404071655.AA00724@Tux.Music.ASU.Edu> X-Sender: ben@localhost Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 7 Apr 1994 09:58:58 -0700 To: KRAV.DPCPO004@DSKMGWS1.itg.ti.com (Alan Kravitz), list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Commercial Listserv Providers Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 2:45 PM 4/6/94 -0600, Alan Kravitz wrote: >[. . .] >TI does have a presence on the Internet, but for security reasons, we can't >host lists and provide anonymous ftp from computing resources on TI's >internal network. Therefore, we'd like to locate a service provider who is >in the business of providing these kinds of services. What not put a single machine on the other side of your firewall? It sounds like you've got all the expertise and equipment you need; why pay somebody else to do what you can do just as well yourself? >Again, any help from list managers would be greatly appreciated. > >Regards, >Alan Kravitz b& ---- Ben.Goren@asu.edu, Arizona State University School of Music Protect your privacy; oppose Clipper. Write to me for info. Finger ben@tux.music.asu.edu for PGP 2.3a public key. From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 8 14:45:20 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id OAA18931; Fri, 8 Apr 1994 14:45:20 GMT Received: from CVI.HAHNEMANN.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id HAA18925; Fri, 8 Apr 1994 07:45:10 -0700 Received: by cvi.hahnemann.edu (MX V3.3 VAX) id 20913; Fri, 08 Apr 1994 10:17:31 EDT Date: Fri, 08 Apr 1994 10:17:27 EDT From: "Anthony J. Rzepela" To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Message-ID: <0097CA50.F130A300.20913@cvi.hahnemann.edu> Subject: It has a LOT to do with list management issues Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk pmdatropos@aol.com writes: > Personally, I don't see what the continuation of this thread has to do with > managing mailing lists, so I encourage further discussion to take place in a > more appropriate forum. It has a lot to do with it. AOLers (and others, for sure) have been a list management headache for some time. Some of us have shorter tempers than others. A thorough airing of the true sequence of events in this debacle, is, IMHO, extremely important to anyone even toying with the idea of making AOL angry. > Mr Rzepela only received *carbon-copies* of messages sent to other > individuals. My *original* response was to him, this list (which was delayed > due to an error on my part; heaven forbid I actually be human and make > mistakes), and two other individuals. I get the digest. I still haven't seen either of the messages you sent to me appear here, except that I was gracious enough to forward the first one. Regardless of where they were supposed to go, you DID, in the second, attribute someone else's moaning about AOL to me, and that attribution was WRONG. Seeing the heavy penalties one suffers for moaning about AOL these days, that is a pretty serious misattribution. > You are, of course, welcome to believe what you will. We are satisfied that > the investigation performed by NASA on its equipment was sufficient. You were also satisfied that you knew how to work email. > Clearly they must have found evidence which indicated *to them* > that something had happened. You have absolutely no basis for saying that. Unless there was some other mail that still hasn't gotten from you to the list, I have seen NO evidence that the "government" site did anything except shut down a filmmakers' list, which, while annoying, is certainly within their domain (i.e., making sure their resources are being spent as they see fit). > Our role in this affair was to alert them to a possible security > breach at one of their machines. And what, exactly, was this "security breach"? What measures, exactly, did they take, apart from shutting down a list that wasn't supposed to be there in the first place, a piece of information probably discovered in their "investigation"? This statement: > Clearly they must have found evidence which indicated *to them* > that something had happened. is just stoopid. Sounds to me like somebody pissed off AOL, and paid. If that's the way you people operate, it IS a list managers' issue. +------ Anthony J. Rzepela rzepela@cvi.hahnemann.edu -----+ | Hahnemann University, Philadelphia (215) 762-7741 | | I do not speak for, or represent, Hahnemann University or AHERF. | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 8 18:52:16 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id SAA20548; Fri, 8 Apr 1994 18:52:16 GMT Received: from albert.gnu.ai.mit.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id LAA20535; Fri, 8 Apr 1994 11:51:52 -0700 From: tower@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: from nutrimat.gnu.ai.mit.edu by albert.gnu.ai.mit.edu (5.65/4.0) with SMTP id ; Fri, 8 Apr 94 14:51:15 -0400 Received: by nutrimat.gnu.ai.mit.edu (15.11/4.0) id ; Fri, 8 Apr 94 14:51:11 edt Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 14:51:11 edt Message-Id: <9404081851.AA02487@nutrimat.gnu.ai.mit.edu> To: rzepela@cvi.hahnemann.edu Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <0097CA50.F130A300.20913@cvi.hahnemann.edu> "rzepela@cvi.hahnemann.edu" Reply-To: tower@prep.ai.mit.edu Organization: Project GNU, Free Software Foundation, 675 Massachusetts Ave., Cambridge, MA 02139-3309, USA +1-617-876-3296 Home: 36 Porter Street, Somerville, MA 02143, USA +1-617-623-7739 Subject: It has a LOT to do with list management issues Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk oland From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 8 20:26:23 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id UAA21212; Fri, 8 Apr 1994 20:26:23 GMT Received: from mailgate.prod.aol.net by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id NAA21206; Fri, 8 Apr 1994 13:25:55 -0700 From: pmdatropos@aol.com Received: by mailgate.prod.aol.net (1.37.109.4/16.2) id AA24685; Fri, 8 Apr 94 16:22:28 -0400 X-Mailer: America Online Mailer Message-Id: <9404081622.tn556416@aol.com> To: list-managers@GREATCIRCLE.COM Date: Fri, 08 Apr 94 16:22:26 EDT Subject: Re: It has a LOT to do with l... Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk rzepela@cvi.hahnemann.edu writes: [ ... ] >AOLers (and others, for sure) have been a list management headache >for some time. Some of us have shorter tempers than others. A >thorough airing of the true sequence of events in this debacle, is, >IMHO, extremely important to anyone even toying with the idea of >making AOL angry. And the true sequence has been aired. To summarise: (1) Several weeks ago I received bounced mail which indicated that a USENET article allegedly by me was being returned for bad headers. (2) Since this article did not originate from me, we contacted the postmasters at the sites where the mail had either originated or traversed a connection. The responses from all by the postmaster@grissom.larc.nasa.gov were sufficiently authoritative to satisfy our concerns. (3) Since the postmaster@grissom..'s was not, we were concerned that there may have been a security breach at that site. We contacted NASA and informed them of our concern. (4) Several days later we recived mail from NASA indicating they had investigated the event and that they considered the case closed. (5) An article alleging that America Online had complained to Scott Dorsey's management of his "mail forgery" and "misuse of government equipment", and calling for a complaint campaign, appeared in this and other lists and newsgroups. (6) I responded to this initial wave with the situation as it took place on our side, mentioning repeatedly that Mr Dorsey was *NOT* accused of any wrongdoing, and that we at NO TIME asked his management to tell him to shut down the filmmakers list. To be blunt, the claims in the letter sent here and elsewhere are completely fraudulent. (7) Since this event has been dragged out, we have contacted NASA again for further details. We were informed that NASA had obtained conclusive evidence that grissom.larc.nasa.gov was involved in the forgery of a USENET article. >Regardless of where they were supposed to go, you DID, >in the second, attribute someone else's moaning about AOL to me, >and that attribution was WRONG. Seeing the heavy penalties one >suffers for moaning about AOL these days, that is a pretty serious >misattribution. Seeing that the "heavy penalties one suffers" are baseless, I assume you can draw your own conclusions. >> Clearly they must have found evidence which indicated *to them* >> that something had happened. >You have absolutely no basis for saying that. See points (4) and (7), above. I have more than enough reason to state the above. >Unless there was some other mail that still hasn't gotten from >you to the list, I have seen NO evidence that the "government" >site did anything except shut down a filmmakers' list, which, >while annoying, is certainly within their domain (i.e., making sure >their resources are being spent as they see fit). Again, see (7). I will reiterate AGAIN that we were not involved in any effort to shut down the filmmakers list. >> Our role in this affair was to alert them to a possible security >> breach at one of their machines. >And what, exactly, was this "security breach"? What measures, >exactly, did they take, apart from shutting down a list that >wasn't supposed to be there in the first place, a piece of information >probably discovered in their "investigation"? See the numbered items above. NASA did not divulge their methods to us, and I do not particularly see why we have reason to question them. >Sounds to me like somebody pissed off AOL, and paid. No, it sounds like someone is trying to mount yet another bash-America Online campaign. >If that's the way you people operate, it IS a list managers' issue. It's not the way we operate. __ David B. O'Donnell (PMDAtropos@aol.com, atropos@aol.net) \/ System Administrator, America Online, Inc. Tel.: +1 703/556-3725 From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 8 23:07:18 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id XAA21892; Fri, 8 Apr 1994 23:07:18 GMT Received: from mycroft.GreatCircle.COM by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id QAA21885; Fri, 8 Apr 1994 16:07:13 -0700 Message-Id: <199404082307.QAA21885@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> To: list-managers@GREATCIRCLE.COM Subject: Re: It has a LOT to do with l... Date: Fri, 08 Apr 1994 16:07:11 -0700 From: Brent Chapman Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Folks, this is getting a little personal. List-Managers is a remarkably flame-free list, and I'd like it to stay that way. Thanks! -Brent -- Brent Chapman | Great Circle Associates | Call or email for info about Brent@GreatCircle.COM | 1057 West Dana Street | upcoming Internet Security +1 415 962 0841 | Mountain View, CA 94041 | Firewalls Tutorial dates From list-managers-owner Sun Apr 10 00:23:37 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id AAA01365; Sun, 10 Apr 1994 00:23:37 GMT Received: from tanuki.twics.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id RAA01218; Sat, 9 Apr 1994 17:04:57 -0700 Received: by tanuki.twics.com (MX V4.0 VAX) id 26; Sun, 10 Apr 1994 09:05:22 JST Date: Sun, 10 Apr 1994 09:05:20 JST From: dkanagy@twics.com Reply-To: dkanagy@twics.com To: LIST-MANAGERS@GREATCIRCLE.COM Message-ID: <0097CBD9.332DF260.26@tanuki.twics.com> Subject: Missing subscriber list Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I administer a list for Japanese/English translators at NETCOM called HONYAKU. I recently ran into an unsettling problem. One person managed to subscribe to the list with a nonstandard address that was causing repeated delivery errors. As a result, I decided to unsubscribe the address since this person wasn't receiving anything from the list anyway and since the address was just cluttering up my mailbox. (This is not the unsettling problem.) But in trying to do so, majordomo at NETCOM did not accept my command, saying there was no match for the address I tried to unsubscribe. Wondering if there might be a discrepancy between the address I tried to unsubscribe and how the address was actually recorded, I sent the "who honyaku" command to confirm. This yielded a list with no names on it. This morning a submission by someone who has been on the list for some time bounced, someone whose address I know is valid. (I have HONYAKU set to external moderation.) Also, I received e-mail from the list server saying a new person had subscribed. Doing another "who honyaku," I received a list with only one person on it--the latest subscriber. This suggests to me that the list of HONYAKU subscribers at NETCOM has been wiped out for some reason. If true, this is extremely unsettling. What could cause something like this and how can I prevent this from happening again? Naturally, I'm raising the matter with NETCOM but I'm also asking the question here to see what I can learn about this problem. I'm quite new at administering mailing lists. HONYAKU got its start the first week of March. Any help or advice with this problem will be greatly appreciated. ________________________________________________________________________ Dan Kanagy dkanagy@twics.com Tokyo, Japan dkanagy@netcom.com From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 11 11:38:51 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id LAA08718; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 11:38:51 GMT Received: from ifi.uio.no by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id EAA08712; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 04:38:43 -0700 Received: from solva.ifi.uio.no (1232@solva.ifi.uio.no [129.240.70.2]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.8.1/ifi2.4) id for ; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 13:38:31 +0200 From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme Received: (from kjetilho@localhost) by solva.ifi.uio.no ; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 13:38:30 +0200 Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 13:38:30 +0200 Message-Id: <199404111138.6088.solva.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Transient failures == lots of warnings Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I run a couple of moderate sized mailing lists by hand with traditional Unix software. Lately, I've been getting storms of "bounces" from mail hosts which think it is proper to notify the sender that the mail has been in the queue for 4 hours or a day without successful delivery. This is fine for personal correspendence, but it just a nuisance and a waste of bandwidth to do this for mailing lists. That's the problem. Is there a solution? I would like the possibility to add information that I don't want warning bounces somewhere in the headers. Some people put a Priority header in their mail. Are any mail configurations set up so as to for example neglect sending bounces to messages with "Priority: junk"? Any ideas welcome. Kjetil T. From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 11 13:52:35 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id NAA09337; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 13:52:35 GMT Received: from ncar.UCAR.EDU by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id GAA09331; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 06:52:21 -0700 From: woods@ncar.UCAR.EDU (Greg Woods) Message-Id: <199404111350.HAA04146@ncar.ucar.EDU> Received: from localhost by ncar.ucar.EDU (8.6.5/ NCAR Central Post Office 03/11/93) id HAA04146; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 07:50:03 -0600 Subject: Re: Transient failures == lots of warnings To: kjetilho@ifi.uio.no (Kjetil Torgrim Homme) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 7:50:02 MDT Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199404111138.6088.solva.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no>; from "Kjetil Torgrim Homme" at Apr 11, 94 1:38 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I can't speak for the general case, but we have a queue warning mechanism in place here, that sends warning messages after 1 hour and after 24 hours (our post office machine will bounce the entire message if it has not been delivered for 5 days, and our users complained vigorously about not having any way to know if their mail is still queued on the post office system during that time). Our particular program is designed to only send these warnings to senders within our own domain. The point of mentioning this is that there is not, to my knowledge, any standard way of implementing this. We did it from scratch. The site in question probably did so as well; you might try contacting the postmaster at that particular site. They may simply not realize that the messages are annoying to you. --Greg (postmaster@ucar.edu) From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 11 14:08:12 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id OAA09413; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 14:08:12 GMT Received: from de5.CTD.ORNL.GOV by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id HAA09407; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 07:08:02 -0700 Received: (from de5@localhost) by de5.CTD.ORNL.GOV (8.6.7/8.6.6) id KAA17520; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 10:07:44 -0400 Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 10:07:44 -0400 From: Dave Sill Message-Id: <199404111407.KAA17520@de5.CTD.ORNL.GOV> To: woods@ncar.UCAR.EDU (Greg Woods) Cc: kjetilho@ifi.uio.no (Kjetil Torgrim Homme), list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Transient failures == lots of warnings In-Reply-To: <199404111350.HAA04146@ncar.ucar.EDU> References: <199404111138.6088.solva.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> <199404111350.HAA04146@ncar.ucar.EDU> Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >I can't speak for the general case, but we have a queue warning mechanism >in place here, that sends warning messages after 1 hour and after 24 hours >(our post office machine will bounce the entire message if it has not been >delivered for 5 days, and our users complained vigorously about not >having any way to know if their mail is still queued on the post office >system during that time). Our particular program is designed to only send >these warnings to senders within our own domain. > >The point of mentioning this is that there is not, to my knowledge, >any standard way of implementing this. We did it from scratch. The >site in question probably did so as well; you might try contacting >the postmaster at that particular site. They may simply not realize >that the messages are annoying to you. This is a standard feature of sendmail 8. From my sendmail.cf: # default message timeout interval OT5d/4h Which means bounce after 5 days, warn after 4 hours. -- Dave Sill (de5@ornl.gov) I dream of a televisionland where it will be Martin Marietta Energy Systems as hard for a network to expose us to violence Workstation Support as it is for me to tell someone they have spinach on their teeth. --Paula Poundstone URL http://www.dec.com/pub/DEC/DECinfo/html/dsill.html From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 11 16:06:36 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id QAA10017; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 16:06:36 GMT Received: from mv.mv.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id JAA10011; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 09:06:22 -0700 Received: by mv.mv.com (8.6.8/mem-931109) id MAA28471; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 12:06:13 -0400 From: "Mark E. Mallett" Message-Id: <199404111606.MAA28471@mv.mv.com> Subject: Re: Transient failures == lots of warnings To: kjetilho@ifi.uio.no (Kjetil Torgrim Homme) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 12:06:13 -0400 (WET DST) Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <199404111138.6088.solva.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> from "Kjetil Torgrim Homme" at Apr 11, 94 01:38:30 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL17] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 470 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > Lately, I've been getting storms of "bounces" from mail hosts which > think it is proper to notify the sender that the mail has been in the > queue for 4 hours or a day without successful delivery. This is fine > for personal correspendence, but it just a nuisance and a waste of > bandwidth to do this for mailing lists. I believe that if you put a "Precedence: list" in your mail header, sendmail will abstain from sending you those warning-only messages. -mm- From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 11 18:36:30 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id SAA10397; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 18:36:30 GMT Received: from spiff.ccs.carleton.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id LAA10391; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 11:36:18 -0700 Received: by spiff.ccs.carleton.ca (4.1/SMI-4.0-mcr) id AA10028; Mon, 11 Apr 94 14:37:05 EDT Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 14:37:05 EDT From: mcr@spiff.ccs.carleton.ca (Michael Richardson) Message-Id: <9404111837.AA10028@spiff.ccs.carleton.ca> To: woods@ncar.UCAR.EDU Cc: kjetilho@ifi.uio.no, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Greg Woods's message of Mon, 11 Apr 94 7:50:02 MDT <199404111350.HAA04146@ncar.ucar.EDU> Subject: Transient failures == lots of warnings Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Most UUCP implementations provide for no-connection warnings. This is usually implemented in the 'uucleanup' command, and is called from uudemon.daily. This is a transport level thing, so it bounces queued news as well as queued mail, and does not examine headers. The only way I can see modifying that behaviour would be via a flag to uux, and patches to sendmail/smail to allow choice of deliver agent based on Priority: header. From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 11 19:02:18 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id TAA10516; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 19:02:18 GMT Received: from wilma.cs.utk.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id MAA10510; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 12:02:08 -0700 Received: from LOCALHOST by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.9c-UTK) id PAA09125; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 15:01:20 -0400 Message-Id: <199404111901.PAA09125@wilma.cs.utk.edu> From: Keith Moore To: "Mark E. Mallett" cc: kjetilho@ifi.uio.no (Kjetil Torgrim Homme), list-managers@greatcircle.com, moore@cs.utk.edu Subject: Re: Transient failures == lots of warnings In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 11 Apr 1994 12:06:13 EDT." <199404111606.MAA28471@mv.mv.com> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 15:01:18 -0400 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I believe that if you put a "Precedence: list" in your mail header, > sendmail will abstain from sending you those warning-only messages. Beware: there is at least one mail gateway that will bounce any message that contains a Precedence header with a keyword that it doesn't recognize. In general, it's dangerous to specify any MTA behavior in the header, not just because it's a layering violation, but also because there's no agreement among MTAs to conform to the expected behavior. Keith From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 11 19:20:06 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id TAA10564; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 19:20:06 GMT Received: from mv.mv.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id MAA10556; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 12:19:52 -0700 Received: by mv.mv.com (8.6.8/mem-931109) id PAA26411; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 15:19:16 -0400 From: "Mark E. Mallett" Message-Id: <199404111919.PAA26411@mv.mv.com> Subject: Re: Transient failures == lots of warnings To: moore@cs.utk.edu (Keith Moore) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 15:19:15 -0400 (WET DST) Cc: kjetilho@ifi.uio.no, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, moore@cs.utk.edu In-Reply-To: <199404111901.PAA09125@wilma.cs.utk.edu> from "Keith Moore" at Apr 11, 94 03:01:18 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL17] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1272 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > I believe that if you put a "Precedence: list" in your mail header, > > sendmail will abstain from sending you those warning-only messages. > > Beware: there is at least one mail gateway that will bounce any > message that contains a Precedence header with a keyword that > it doesn't recognize. Which mail gateway did you have in mind? > In general, it's dangerous to specify any MTA behavior in the header, > not just because it's a layering violation, but also because there's no > agreement among MTAs to conform to the expected behavior. Perhaps, but it's convenient and at least partially achieves the result. I note, for instance, that your mail to me (which I am quoting) arrived with a "Precedence: bulk" in the header. People use this because it works for many cases, and although some mail systems ignore it, it is better to use it and have some advantage from it, than not to use it and have no advantage from it. The killer that you mentioned above (a mail gateway that rejects mail with header elements it doesn't like) would seem to present a choice between two evils, and you pick which one you want to deal with. Best if that mail gateway could be convinced that it didn't have an absolute knowledge of what was best for everyone. :-) -mm- From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 11 21:02:25 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id VAA10870; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 21:02:25 GMT Received: from wilma.cs.utk.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id OAA10864; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 14:02:12 -0700 Received: from LOCALHOST by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.9c-UTK) id RAA09241; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 17:01:24 -0400 Message-Id: <199404112101.RAA09241@wilma.cs.utk.edu> From: Keith Moore To: "Mark E. Mallett" cc: moore@cs.utk.edu (Keith Moore), kjetilho@ifi.uio.no, list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Transient failures == lots of warnings In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 11 Apr 1994 15:19:15 EDT." <199404111919.PAA26411@mv.mv.com> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 17:01:23 -0400 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > > I believe that if you put a "Precedence: list" in your mail header, > > > sendmail will abstain from sending you those warning-only messages. > > > > Beware: there is at least one mail gateway that will bounce any > > message that contains a Precedence header with a keyword that > > it doesn't recognize. > > Which mail gateway did you have in mind? I don't know the exact name. It's a DEC product for gatewaying between RFC 822 mail on Ultrix and mailbus. The problem was, for mail to the Internet, it tried to map the mailbus "precedence" value into the 822 precedence header, and they don't have the same meaning. (not that the 822 meaning is defined.) > > In general, it's dangerous to specify any MTA behavior in the header, > > not just because it's a layering violation, but also because there's > > no agreement among MTAs to conform to the expected behavior. > > Perhaps, but it's convenient and at least partially achieves the > result. But at what cost? These things cause real operational problems in the global Internet mail system. > I note, for instance, that your mail to me (which I am > quoting) arrived with a "Precedence: bulk" in the header. People > use this because it works for many cases, and although some mail > systems ignore it, it is better to use it and have some advantage > from it, than not to use it and have no advantage from it. Again, you have to consider the cost. As it turns out, I have experience that "Precedence: bulk" doesn't cause problems with that particular gateway, but that "Precedence: junk" does. So I made a design decision in my own list expander to label list traffic with "Precedence: bulk" to keep from getting messages from vacation. (I'm pretty sure that the same gateway would bounce "Precedence: list") The amount of brain-damage results from using ad hoc protocols keeps increasing. I realize that things like Precedence, Return-Receipt-To, and Errors-To were created to address real needs and aren't going to go away anytime soon -- certainly not until there's a better mechanism that's widely deployed. But I want to discourage people from inventing/using new ad-hoc mechanisms, especially by specifying MTA-level functionality at the UA-level protocol. Such actions deteriorate the reliability of the Internet mail system. Keith From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 11 22:39:48 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id WAA11273; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 22:39:48 GMT Received: from urth.acsu.buffalo.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id PAA11267; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 15:39:41 -0700 Received: (pjg@localhost) by urth (8.6.8/8.6.4) id SAA26372 for list-managers@GreatCircle.COM; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 18:39:45 -0400 Date: Mon, 11 Apr 1994 18:39:45 -0400 From: Paul Graham Message-Id: <199404112239.SAA26372@urth.acsu.buffalo.edu> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: return-receipt-to: attack Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk a list i'm on (operlist@kei.com) received a message with return-receipt-to: operlist@kei.com. this turns out to be a bit annoying. has anyone else seen this? anything besides sendmail susceptible? what sorts of techniques are used to deal with this? the lists i run elide the line so i assume that this will only encourage sendmail the one time. From list-managers-owner Mon Apr 11 23:27:27 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id XAA11431; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 23:27:27 GMT Received: from bluejay.creighton.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id QAA11425; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 16:27:13 -0700 Message-Id: <199404112327.QAA11425@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Received: by bluejay.creighton.edu (1.38.193.5/16.2) id AA06002; Mon, 11 Apr 1994 18:26:48 -0500 From: Larry Sheldon Subject: Re: return-receipt-to: attack To: pjg@acsu.buffalo.edu (Paul Graham) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 94 18:26:47 CDT Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com In-Reply-To: <199404112239.SAA26372@urth.acsu.buffalo.edu>; from "Paul Graham" at Apr 11, 94 6:39 pm Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85.2.1] Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Paul Graham said: > a list i'm on (operlist@kei.com) received a message with > return-receipt-to: operlist@kei.com. this turns out to be a bit > annoying. has anyone else seen this? anything besides sendmail > susceptible? what sorts of techniques are used to deal with this? > the lists i run elide the line so i assume that this will only > encourage sendmail the one time. We had the problem here, but I don't think it was sendmail that was the major problem--as near as I can tell, the first MTA to hanndle some of the return requests, send a reply back, but the major problem was that majordomo passed the offending headers (there are at least two to worry about) thru-- and every Pegasus UA sent the reply back to the list, which sent . . . and so on and so on. I hacked majordomo to throw the offending headers away on input. I can probably find the hack and pass it along if anybody is interested in it. Your mileage may vary. -- -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- . L. F. (Larry) Sheldon, Jr. . - Unix Systems Administration - . Creighton University Computer Center - Old Gym . - 2500 California Plaza - . Omaha, Nebraska, U.S.A. 68178 . - 402 280 2254 lsheldon@creighton.edu - . . - A hundred thousand lemmings can't be wrong. - .-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 14 18:15:22 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id SAA27104; Thu, 14 Apr 1994 18:15:22 GMT Received: from wilma.cs.utk.edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id LAA27097; Thu, 14 Apr 1994 11:15:08 -0700 Received: from LOCALHOST by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.9c-UTK) id OAA18929; Thu, 14 Apr 1994 14:14:22 -0400 Message-Id: <199404141814.OAA18929@wilma.cs.utk.edu> From: Keith Moore To: "Mark E. Mallett" cc: moore@cs.utk.edu (Keith Moore), kjetilho@ifi.uio.no, list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Transient failures == lots of warnings In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 11 Apr 1994 15:19:15 EDT." <199404111919.PAA26411@mv.mv.com> Date: Thu, 14 Apr 1994 14:14:21 -0400 Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Another comment re: "precedence: list" > The killer that you mentioned above (a mail gateway that rejects mail > with header elements it doesn't like) would seem to present a choice > between two evils, and you pick which one you want to deal with. > Best if that mail gateway could be convinced that it didn't have > an absolute knowledge of what was best for everyone. :-) This is just the "agreement" problem in disguise. Sendmail has its own idea of what "precedence" means. In the mailbus environment, "precedence" means something different, which has nothing to do with whether transient failure reports, vacation messages, etc., should be issued. No doubt both of these are "convinced" that their use of the precedence header doesn't cause any problems for anyone else. ``When I use a word,'' Humpty Dumpty said in a rather scornful tone, ``it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor less.'' ``The question is,'' said Alice, ``whether you _can_ make words mean so many different things.'' ``The question is,'' said Humpty Dumpty, ``which is to be master-- that's all.'' - from Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Carroll From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 16 01:10:30 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id BAA07491; Sat, 16 Apr 1994 01:10:30 GMT Received: from relay1.UU.NET by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id SAA07485; Fri, 15 Apr 1994 18:10:23 -0700 From: asharpe@sco.COM Received: from sco.sco.COM by relay1.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AAwluq12473; Fri, 15 Apr 94 21:10:31 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Apr 94 21:10:31 -0400 Resent-Message-Id: <9404160110.AAwluq12473@relay1.UU.NET> Message-Id: <9404160110.AAwluq12473@relay1.UU.NET> Received: from ergo.sco.COM by sco.sco.COM id aa28031; Fri, 15 Apr 94 19:13:25 PDT Resent-From: Andrew Sharpe Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 1994 18:06:24 -0700 X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.4 2/2/92) Resent-To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com Apparently-To: Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk From asharpe Fri Apr 15 17:53:03 1994 Received: from srv150a.sco.COM by ergo.sco.com id aa07809; 15 Apr 94 17:53 PDT Received: from sco.sco.COM by srv150a.sco.com id aa28207; 15 Apr 94 17:59 PDT Received: from SGI.COM by sco.sco.COM id aa27423; Fri, 15 Apr 94 18:55:50 PDT Received: from payday2 by sgi.sgi.com via UUCP (931110.SGI/910110.SGI) for asharpe@sco.COM id AA06295; Fri, 15 Apr 94 17:52:53 -0700 Received: by payday2 (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA00411; Fri, 15 Apr 94 17:51:46 PDT Date: Fri, 15 Apr 94 17:51:46 PDT Message-Id: <9404160051.AA00411@payday2> To: asharpe@sco.COM Subject: Re: Please Subscribe From: Intuitive Systems Postmaster Your message to Digital Games cannot be delivered because the electronic magazine has been permanently shut down. If you can notify the person, list, or site that supplied you with the information on Digital Games, that'll ensure that others don't also go through this confusion. Questions? Feel free to drop me a note at "taylor@intuitive.com". Happy gaming! -- Dave Taylor former editor, Digital Games Review ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- YOUR ORIGINAL MESSAGE: for payday2!digital-games.intuitive.com!digital-games-request id AA06222; Fri, 15 Apr 94 17:51:12 -0700 (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AAwlup08846; Fri, 15 Apr 94 20:51:10 -0400 From: Andrew Sharpe Date: Fri, 15 Apr 1994 17:47:01 -0700 X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.4 2/2/92) To: digital-games.intuitive.com!digital-games-request@intuitive.com Subject: Please Subscribe Message-Id: <9404151747.aa07792@ergo.sco.com> SUBSCRIBE Andrew Sharpe From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 21 21:38:40 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id VAA01848; Thu, 21 Apr 1994 21:38:40 GMT Received: from walt.disney.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id OAA01842; Thu, 21 Apr 1994 14:38:32 -0700 From: sullivan@fa.disney.com Received: from dalsdb by walt.disney.com with SMTP id AA22224 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.3 for List-Managers@greatcircle.com); Wed, 20 Apr 1994 17:20:23 -0700 Received: by dalsdb (Smail3.1.28.1 #53) id m0ptmSL-000Fc9C; Wed, 20 Apr 94 17:17 PDT Message-Id: Date: Wed, 20 Apr 94 17:17 PDT To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Superhighway Growth Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk This is a topic I alluded to in an earlier post but now I actually have to deal with: tremendous list membership growth. In less than a year my "weights" list has gone from under 500 subscribers and a mailing (it's digest-only) pretty much every day to over 1400 subscribers today and days with more than one mailing due to the number of contributions not uncommon. It's so big that I can only send the issues out at night or face the wrath of everybody here for clogging up the mail queue. Actually my main reason for asking about the list breakup is the volume of contributions rather than the number of subscribers. People are actually leaving the list because they don't want to wade through all of the contributions. I want people to find the list useful but if it's too cluttered, it becomes less useful. I've started a discussion on the list of possibly narrowing the focus of the list and breaking off part into a newsgroup so we'll see how that goes. I guess my question is, how are you folks handling this recent growth spurt (if you're seeing one)? Is your volume becoming such that there's just too much information? How are your machines handling the volume? If you think things are bad now, what do you think is going to happen in the next year? Michael Sullivan sullivan@fa.disney.com Walt Disney Feature Animation +1 818 544 2683 (voice) Glendale, CA +1 818 544 4579 (fax) From list-managers-owner Thu Apr 21 22:41:48 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id WAA02412; Thu, 21 Apr 1994 22:41:48 GMT Received: from apple.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id PAA02406; Thu, 21 Apr 1994 15:41:40 -0700 Received: by apple.com (5.61/8-Oct-1993-eef) id AA27470; Thu, 21 Apr 94 15:42:01 -0700 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Thu, 21 Apr 94 15:42:01 -0700 From: Chuq Von Rospach Message-Id: <9404212242.AA27470@apple.com> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM, sullivan@fa.disney.com Subject: Re: Superhighway Growth Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >I guess my question is, how are you folks handling this recent growth spurt >(if you're seeing one)? Is your volume becoming such that there's just >too much information? How are your machines handling the volume? If >you think things are bad now, what do you think is going to happen in >the next year? I've just switched from a manual system to listproc (with fewer glitches than expected, too), but beyond that, I took the time to restructure two of the three lists we run here. the minor league list got split in two, minors and minors-scores, because that seemed to be a logical break in the data. The SF Giants list is now four: giants, giants-tickets (buy/sell), giants-scores and baseball-caht (for all that stuff that we'd love to send to rec.sports.baseball, but we can't tolerate the noise). We're probably also going to split the Sharks list into four pieces soon. fortunately, the lists have certain sub-sets of information that pretty clearly have audiences that polarize. People either are or aren't interested in buying tickets to games, so by splitting it off, we clear that stuff out of the boxes of the "aren't" group without impacting the "are". So far (very early returns), it seems to be working. From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 22 12:18:33 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id MAA06234; Fri, 22 Apr 1994 12:18:33 GMT Received: from z.nsf.gov by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id FAA06228; Fri, 22 Apr 1994 05:18:26 -0700 Received: from localhost (mmorse@localhost) by z.nsf.gov (8.6.4/8.6.4) id IAA29207; Fri, 22 Apr 1994 08:18:21 -0400 Message-Id: <199404221218.IAA29207@z.nsf.gov> From: mmorse@nsf.gov (Michael H. Morse) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 08:18:20 EDT In-Reply-To: sullivan@fa.disney.com "Superhighway Growth" (Apr 20, 5:17pm) X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: sullivan@fa.disney.com, List-Managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Superhighway Growth Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > If > you think things are bad now, what do you think is going to happen in > the next year? I think it's going to get unmanageable everywhere. Netnews, which is much better able to handle this architecturally is already swamped in many topics. Some topics just don't split well. In other words, if you split them, almost all members subscribe to all the splits. The only solution I can think of is multiple communities discussing the same subject. In other words, multiple independent mailing lists that discuss the same topic. A person would pick one to join, and only discuss with folks on that list. In a way, this is already happening on things like Compuserv or AOL, where you only discuss with other people who pay the same vendor to be a member. But those services will eventually be so big they have the same problem. How would one decide which list to join? Geographical separation occurred to me first, but it doesn't make that much sense on the Internet. This wouldn't be a perfect solution (or even close) since many people with obscure questions would post to all the lists on the topic, and there would be a great need for cross-fertilization, such as maintaining FAQ lists. To use an example from the "real" world: You can't have a "discussion" in a room with 500 participants. The only solution I see is to break the group up into smaller groups. I don't think there are any examples of where this has been tried, though. --Mike From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 22 12:46:36 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id MAA06341; Fri, 22 Apr 1994 12:46:36 GMT Received: from vector.casti.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id FAA06334; Fri, 22 Apr 1994 05:46:15 -0700 Received: by vector.casti.com (NX5.67d/5.931230) id AA25510; Fri, 22 Apr 94 08:43:23 -0400 Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 08:37:34 -0400 (EDT) From: David Casti Subject: Re: Superhighway Growth To: "Michael H. Morse" Cc: sullivan@fa.disney.com, List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199404221218.IAA29207@z.nsf.gov> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Fri, 22 Apr 1994, Michael H. Morse wrote: > I think it's going to get unmanageable everywhere. Netnews, which is > much better able to handle this architecturally is already swamped in > many topics. Some topics just don't split well. In other words, if > you split them, almost all members subscribe to all the splits. True, but threading goes a long way to help this. It isn't necessary for you to read every message in a newsgroup -- only the ones on the subtopics that catch your attention. Add to this various autoselection tools and "scoring" newsreaders, and you've gained the ability to wade through a tremendous amount of information intelligently. I don't see how this helps mailing lists, though. Perhaps the mail as a conference tool will be of diminishing importance as more powerful network conferencing systems are developed. Lists will be confined to small groups of friends or specialized topics which aren't discussed widely enough to warrant a newsgroup. David. From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 22 16:53:44 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id QAA07828; Fri, 22 Apr 1994 16:53:44 GMT Received: from Tux.Music.ASU.Edu by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id JAA07822; Fri, 22 Apr 1994 09:53:37 -0700 From: Ben.Goren@asu.edu Received: from Tux.Music.ASU.Edu by Tux.Music.ASU.Edu (5.64/A/UX-3.00) id AA26053; Fri, 22 Apr 94 09:54:35 MST Message-Id: <9404221654.AA26053@Tux.Music.ASU.Edu> X-Sender: ben@localhost Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 09:54:52 -0700 To: mmorse@nsf.gov (Michael H. Morse), sullivan@fa.disney.com, List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Superhighway Growth Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I think it likely that we'll see an increasing number of lists with a small number of "regulars" and vast numbers of lurkers. That's already happened on my favorite lists; I suspect that some lists will have such a structure mandated by their owners. A suggestion some of you might wish to consider: pick a dozen or so regulars you've got now, people whom you trust, and make them all list editors . (With Eric Thomas' LISTSERV, mail sent to the list goes to editors, if specified, and only an editor or an owner can actually post. I suspect other programs have similar facilities.) Then, if somebody wants to post, it first gets filtered through the regulars. If any one of them thinks it's worth passing on to the list, it goes through. If the editors wish, they can come to some sort of consensus to add new people to their ranks. With a carefully selected group of editors, you'll have most points of view already covered, and, presumably a mechanism where others who have something "worthwhile" to say will be heard. It'd have to be done carefully, but it could save an otherwise sinking list. And those who don't like it can always start their own lists. (:-) b& ---- Ben.Goren@asu.edu, Arizona State University School of Music Protect your privacy; oppose Clipper. Write to me for info. Finger ben@tux.music.asu.edu for PGP 2.3a public key. From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 22 16:56:28 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id QAA07867; Fri, 22 Apr 1994 16:56:28 GMT Received: from unixg.ubc.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id JAA07861; Fri, 22 Apr 1994 09:56:20 -0700 Received: by unixg.ubc.ca (4.1/1.14) id AA25905; Fri, 22 Apr 94 09:56:43 PDT Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 09:56:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Richard Porter Subject: Re: Superhighway Growth To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199404221218.IAA29207@z.nsf.gov> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Perhaps as growth goes geometric the diseconomies of scale for open access mail and news groups will force gate keeping by moderators. This has been the experience with ECOLOG-L/sci.bio.ecology, where the sheer volume of newsgroup noise forced the list owner of ECOLOG-L to filter the gateway. The explosion of messages is inevitable for mail reflectors; however software already exists to filter subscribers and exclude non-members. I believe the real problem will lie with straight mail. Just as it pays for marketers to seek out and compile smail addresses, it will pay marketers to do the same for email. And they can set up there own mail reflectors (particularly if they access through PFS servers, such as Compu$erve or AOL, or if they have their own net access). I cannot prevent people from sending directly to my address. I am far more concerned with junk mail sent directly to me, rather than via reflectors and listserv/listproc and its variants. richard m porter From list-managers-owner Fri Apr 22 19:11:39 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id TAA08657; Fri, 22 Apr 1994 19:11:39 GMT Received: from eros.britain.eu.net by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id MAA08651; Fri, 22 Apr 1994 12:11:25 -0700 Received: from andersen.co.uk by eros.britain.eu.net with UUCP id ; Fri, 22 Apr 1994 20:10:57 +0100 Received: by andersen.co.uk (4.1/sp-0.1) id AA01375; Fri, 22 Apr 94 15:13:08 BST Newsgroups: mail.list-managers-digest Path: sdpage From: sdpage@andersen.co.uk (Stephen Page) Subject: Re: Superhighway Growth Message-Id: <1994Apr22.141304.1329@andersen.co.uk> Organization: Andersen Consulting (UK Practice) References: <199404220810.BAA05156@mycroft.GreatCircle.COM> Distribution: local Date: Fri, 22 Apr 1994 14:13:04 GMT Lines: 23 Apparently-To: list-managers@GreatCircle.com Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >>I guess my question is, how are you folks handling this recent growth spurt >>(if you're seeing one)? I have also had a recent explosion in list size, largely because people do not read the charter before subscribing (therefore a large percentage of requests to my still-manual list come in sub/unsub pairs separated by a few weeks). I have been wondering whether we should try to encourage some of the large hub owners, eg aol.com, pan.com, etc to manage their own redistributions. We would just mail to incoming-listname@aol.com (etc) and the mapping to hundreds of interested people would be handled automagically at the gateway. This would surely be very much easier for those of us who manage lists (eg the hub owner could manage referential integrity between account and subscriptions, probably with limited effort); and if the interface were right then it would be much easier for the end user also. It would also shift the performance problem from the list maintainers to the recipients. Stephen Page Moderator, Music-Research Digest From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 23 03:36:51 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id DAA10764; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 03:36:51 GMT Received: from cyber.psych.ualberta.ca by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id UAA10758; Fri, 22 Apr 1994 20:36:43 -0700 Received: from loa by cyber.psych.ualberta.ca (NX5.67d) id AA07684; Fri, 22 Apr 94 21:37:01 -0600 Received: by loa.psych.ualberta.ca (NX5.67d/NX3.0S) id AA00399; Fri, 22 Apr 94 21:31:20 -0600 Date: Fri, 22 Apr 94 21:31:20 -0600 From: Gary Finley Message-Id: <9404230331.AA00399@loa.psych.ualberta.ca> Received: by NeXT.Mailer (1.100) Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.100) To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Majordomo Reply-To: gfin@psych.ualberta.ca Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Skip my question of yesterday, thanks. Got your ftp addr from your finger message, and have nabbed Majordomo for a test drive. Looks like exactly what I was after, thanks. -------------------------------------------- Gary Finley, Univ. of Alberta Psychology Dept. gfin@psych.ualberta.ca (NeXTmail welcome!) From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 23 11:53:51 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id LAA12143; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 11:53:51 GMT Received: from mailgate.prod.aol.net by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id EAA12137; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 04:53:44 -0700 From: pmdatropos@aol.com Received: by mailgate.prod.aol.net (1.37.109.4/16.2) id AA27209; Sat, 23 Apr 94 07:51:02 -0400 X-Mailer: America Online Mailer Message-Id: <9404230750.tn74359@aol.com> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sat, 23 Apr 94 07:50:53 EDT Subject: Re: Superhighway Growth Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >From sdpage@andersen.co.uk [ ... ] >I have been wondering whether we should try to encourage some of the large >hub owners, eg aol.com, pan.com, etc to manage their own redistributions. >We would just mail to incoming-listname@aol.com (etc) and the mapping >to hundreds of interested people would be handled automagically at the >gateway. We (America Online) are working on a mechanism to provide mailing lists over our USENET news reader. Once testing is complete, we will be contacting list owners to work with them to provide their lists to our users in thi fashion. We believe that the provision of a single, stable point-of-presence will prove a benefit to the majority of mailing lists to which our members currently subscribe via e-mail. It will also have the benefit of decreasing our e-mail traffic somewhat, which last I heard was approximately 6,000,000 messages a month. __ David B. O'Donnell (PMDAtropos@aol.com, atropos@aol.net) \/ System Administrator, America Online, Inc. Tel.: +1 703/556-3725 List Owner/Editor of Belief-L, GLB-News and SoftRevu From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 23 16:58:55 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id QAA12758; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 16:58:55 GMT Received: from intercon.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id JAA12751; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 09:58:48 -0700 Received: from localhost by intercon.com (Sendmail 8.6.5/940209.RS) id MAA18164; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 12:59:14 -0400 Date: Sat, 23 Apr 1994 12:59:14 -0400 From: jailbait@intercon.com (Jailbait) Message-Id: <199404231659.MAA18164@intercon.com> To: pmdatropos@aol.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Superhighway Growth Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I must say that I disagree with the plan to feed mailing lists into newsgroups. For a great many of the mailing lists out there, I think that if the list maintainters /wanted/ a newsgroup, they would have started one already. Most of the lists I know /like/ having some control over the readers of their lists that is not given by a newsgroup. Anyone else feel this way? JB From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 23 17:03:45 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id RAA12801; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 17:03:45 GMT Received: from intercon.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id KAA12795; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 10:03:37 -0700 Received: from localhost by intercon.com (Sendmail 8.6.5/940209.RS) id NAA18227; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 13:04:06 -0400 Date: Sat, 23 Apr 1994 13:04:06 -0400 From: jailbait@intercon.com (Jailbait) Message-Id: <199404231704.NAA18227@intercon.com> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: One of AOLs problems explained... Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >From a social mailing list I'm on... -------------- From: Dave White Subject: oops! yah know folx, sometimes i fuck up in a really spectacular method. no great surprize there. but at least i admit it. as some of you know, America-OnLine [AOL] has recently provided their customers with internet access. these users have been flooding mailing lists and news groups with new users who do not know much about how the internet works. on one of the internet news groups, i recently posted a mild flame / gentle hint to the aol folx on how to make their post more acceptable, on a style basis. which included proper indentation of quotes, and an 80 character line length. i recieved several responses saying that they would really like to, but that the damned proprietary editor they had to use would not let them. i thought about this, then started to laugh. the AOL software is based on QuantumLink, which in turn was based on PlayNet's software. including a certain damned proprietary editor I wrote back in 1982. argh. legacy software that has not been kept up to current standards. DUH! flaming people for using some brain damaged software, that I wrote. sigh. davo ["Mom and dad say I should make my life an example of the principles I believe in. But every time I do, they tell me to stop it." calvin] From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 23 17:42:03 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id RAA12905; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 17:42:03 GMT Received: from news.std.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id KAA12899; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 10:41:56 -0700 Received: from world.std.com by news.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.1) id AA02008; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 13:41:42 -0400 Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA06243; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 13:41:39 -0400 Date: Sat, 23 Apr 1994 13:41:38 -0400 (EDT) From: Sharon Shea Subject: Re: Superhighway Growth To: Jailbait Cc: pmdatropos@aol.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: <199404231659.MAA18164@intercon.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Sat, 23 Apr 1994, Jailbait wrote: > I must say that I disagree with the plan to feed mailing lists into > newsgroups. For a great many of the mailing lists out there, I think > that if the list maintainters /wanted/ a newsgroup, they would have > started one already. Most of the lists I know /like/ having some > control over the readers of their lists that is not given by a > newsgroup. > > Anyone else feel this way? > > JB I certainly do agree with you. I administrate lists that would go bonkers if the list membership - and communication exchanges- weren't controled in some way. I administrate large lists, two in particular, one addressing women's issues and one that is scientific interest. The largeness of the lists is working well, and managing to have great, diverse conversations without sacrificing that cozy feeling. It is still possible to have intimate conversation going on these large lists. Moving to a newsgroup would blow this away in a minute. -Sharon Owner/women@world.std.com /rocks-and-fossils@world.std.com /witi-east@mit.edu From list-managers-owner Sat Apr 23 17:56:54 1994 Return-Path: Received: from localhost by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id RAA12948; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 17:56:54 GMT Received: from mail.netcom.com by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.5/SMI-4.1/Brent-931103) id KAA12942; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 10:56:48 -0700 Received: from localhost by mail.netcom.com (8.6.4/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id KAA10877; Sat, 23 Apr 1994 10:57:59 -0700 Date: Sat, 23 Apr 1994 10:57:58 -0700 (PDT) From: James Cook Subject: Re: Superhighway Growth To: Sharon Shea cc: Jailbait , pmdatropos@aol.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: List-Managers-Owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk On Sat, 23 Apr 1994, Sharon Shea wrote: > I certainly do agree with you. I administrate lists that would go bonkers > if the list membership - and communication exchanges- weren't controled in > some way. > > I administrate large lists, two in particular, one addressing women's > issues and one that is scientific interest. The largeness of the lists is > working well, and managing to have great, diverse conversations without > sacrificing that cozy feeling. It is still possible to have intimate > conversation going on these large lists. Moving to a newsgroup would blow > this away in a minute. > > -Sharon > Owner/women@world.std.com I would be very interested to hear how large these lists are. I am curious to know from the actual experience of list owners, just how large can a list get without