From list-managers-owner Thu Mar 2 05:31:44 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id FAA02432 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 2 Mar 1995 05:23:00 -0800 Received: from netcom21.netcom.com (netcom21.netcom.com [192.100.81.135]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id FAA02427 for ; Thu, 2 Mar 1995 05:22:56 -0800 Received: from [192.187.167.52] by netcom21.netcom.com (8.6.9/Netcom) id FAA29013; Thu, 2 Mar 1995 05:19:53 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: Level Seven Design X-PGP-KeyID-Fprnt: 4AAF00E5 - 30D81F3484E6A83F 6EC8D7F0CAB3D265 X-PGP-KeyLocation: ftp.netcom.com:/pub/dd/ddt/crypto/ddtPGPkey.txt Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 05:22:37 -0800 To: nruggles@panix.com (Neil Ruggles) From: Dave Del Torto Subject: Re: How should public relations pros work with mailing lists Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 9:10 AM 2/27/95, Neil Ruggles wrote: >>Pricing info should only be posted by persons without a conflict of >>interest and only in clearly labelled, easily deleted forms. > >Dave, third parties who post supposedly unbiased pricing info or favorable >reviews of a vendor may or may not be associated with the vendors. It can >be pretty hard to tell the difference between a serious fan of a given >product and a paid professional promoter. Especially since the promoter >gets paid to be clever. Neil, I've not yet encountered anyone who was a decoy advertiser for a company on any list, and almost always, any infomation provided in the course of a discussion is balanced and includes pros & cons. The only "product advertising" I've seen on lists is spamming by unethical weasels. You must be confusing the Internet I work on with some ideal of an Internet that tolerates the same sort of crass commercialism that the TV networks allow (fake "consumer advocate panels," "infomercials," etc.). Furthermore, if you'll allow me to play Angel's Advocate a moment longer, when people mention commercial products on a list, I expect them to explicitly state that they don't have any financial interest in the company - I always do myself when I mention anything. If they don't state as much, and they endore a product, then they're not being "clever," they're practicing "fraud." Not only that, they're practicing fraud in a medium where thay can be easily traced, which is the inverse of clever. >Here is a quote I picked today (2/27) off a journalism list I subscribe to: > >>BTW, those of you on this list might be interested to know that when I gave >>a speech recently on Internet marketing, one of the attendees told me >>privately that "We have gotten a lot of business off the Net. We have >>chosen about five of our most passionate, positive end-users to lurk for us >>and respond positively to messages about us. We pay them for this." These >>users are not revealing their financial arrangement with the vendor as they >>post their positive comments/recommendations. That's plain unethical. You should inform them of this privately and see what their response is. The "lurkers" who do this for them probably practice forms of fraud or other criminal activities in other parts of their lives, and there's no way to protect against this without establishing a "police force" on the net, something I'm loathe to do. Ethics is a system of beliefs and practices which everyone should agree to support or no-one will benefit from them. >I'm curious whether you would rather have a vendor "sneak" their promotions >into your list by having a third party say good things about them, or have >the promotions clearly identified as as such? You don't offer me much of a choice here, so my answer is "neither one." I still don't see how a vendor could "sneak" promotions onto a list if I didn't allow promotions on the list, without either violating the rules of the list they agreed to when they became a subscriber (they'd get one shot off and be dropped), or by practicing fraud as described above (they might eventually be visited by the real Police if discovered). If people on a list mention something in passing while discussing a topic ("yeah, and these random number generator chips from OBFUSCO, Inc. are perfect for those elliptical curve crypto functions") I'd expect them to follow basic netiquette and mention that they had no financial interest in OBFUSCO, Inc. FYI, I've had discussions at conferences with folks from the FBI's Computer Crime squad who'd like to meet your business aquiaintenances and discuss their methods with them in a poorly-lit room. Their days pulling that sort of fraud are numbered. I have no problem with one or two lines of header information (it can be filtered or switched off pretty easily, and it's no business of mine what you paint on your car as much as it might offend me to look at it in traffic), but I think that lists of an academic nature, which is what I'd be managing, are clearly NOT the place for commercial promotion. Again, there are other ways for such commercial interests to have a place on the net that people _choose_ to visit (URLs, Gopher and FTP sites, etc.). With all the manifold ways to flog products electronically, can't public relations and marketing people be more creative than "putting up billboards in classrooms?" Or must they shove their pap in our faces no matter where we go? I speak of others here, of course: I'm sure this doesn't apply to a thoughtful person like yourself, who's at least asking about the Right Thing from a list-manager's perspective. dave From list-managers-owner Fri Mar 3 10:59:23 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id KAA04331 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 3 Mar 1995 10:53:09 -0800 Received: from bbfm.di.com (bbfm.di.com [204.74.64.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id KAA04326 for ; Fri, 3 Mar 1995 10:53:06 -0800 Received: by bbfm.di.com (8.6.9/TD-1.12) id KAA11993 for List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM on Fri, 3 Mar 1995 10:52:00 -0800 From: Todd Day Message-Id: <199503031852.KAA11993@bbfm.di.com> Subject: What to do when list gets too big? To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Fri, 3 Mar 1995 10:52:00 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <199503030900.BAA29889@miles.greatcircle.com> from "list-managers-digest-owner@GreatCircle.COM" at Mar 3, 95 01:00:13 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2152 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk You might remember from previous posts that I run the Talon/Eclipse/Laser list. This list is going on five years now, and is starting to get a bit out of control. I have something like 500 people on it (pretty small compared to some of your guys' lists, but getting large for me). I've gotten complaints from some of the old timers that the quality of the list is decreasing due to the large amount of newbie questions and rehashed issues. I do make an effort to delete a large number of simple requests and redirect the sender to net resources that can answer their questions (we have a large archive plus a nice little web site). However, I feel if I delete too much of these types of posts, these beginners might feel a little left out of the discussion, so I let some sneak by. This wasn't a problem in the past, but the list is growing pretty rapidly now, enough to significantly impact the true S/N of the list. Another problem is that in '95, there is a new model of the car. The changes from this model to '90-'94 aren't really that significant, but a lot of questions have popped up that '90-'94 people aren't really interesting in answering again. Anyway, I have the following suggestions/questions for improving my list and I want to hear from other list managers that have gone through similar problems. 1) Split the list into sub-topics. pros: perceived S/N should increase keeps the old timers happy newbies can get their own sub-topic cons: I won't be able to heavily edit, due to load more of the typical admin problems (bounces, subscriptions, etc) 2) Stop the "live" feed. You may remember that I allow a digest and non-digest (live) version of the list. A lot of the increased load is due to the people on the live feed replying way too often. pros: S/N should increase, due to less posting cons: a *lot* of people really like the live feed I could solve the problem of heavy editing by threating to unsubscribe anyone posting any of my pet peeves, like too much attribution and long .sigs. So, what have you done with your list when the load gets too heavy and the old timers start grumbling? -todd- From list-managers-owner Fri Mar 3 18:34:02 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id SAA10416 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 3 Mar 1995 18:07:37 -0800 Received: from calon.calon.com (calon.calon.com [199.4.94.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id KAA07815 for ; Thu, 2 Mar 1995 10:24:34 -0800 Message-Id: <199503021824.KAA07815@miles.greatcircle.com> Subject: Help with Moderated List To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 10:20:14 -0800 (PST) From: "Dave Lampson" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 848 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Greetings, and apologies in advance for a newbie question. I have set up a moderated mailing list, defined a distribution list, created an info file, editted the config file, and most things seem to be working fine, except that I can't get anything distributed. Subscribing and retrieving info works, but when I try and approve a post for distribution, it just keeps bouncing back to me. I have tried putting the "Approved:" line in both the header of the message (I use elm) and as the first line in the body of a message, and I've sent it to "list" and not to "list-request", but they just keep getting bounced back for approval. I'm stumped, but surely I'm missing something obvious. I've been through the documentation thoroughly, and can't see any problem with the procedure I'm using. Any suggestions? Thanks, Dave lampson@calon.com From list-managers-owner Sat Mar 4 13:59:11 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id NAA13208 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 4 Mar 1995 13:32:05 -0800 Received: from tta.com (tta.com [198.65.128.193]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id NAA13201 for ; Sat, 4 Mar 1995 13:32:01 -0800 Received: (from stan@localhost) by tta.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) id PAA04051; Sat, 4 Mar 1995 15:11:08 -0600 From: stan@tta.com (Stan Hanks) Message-Id: <199503042111.PAA04051@tta.com> Subject: Re: What to do when list gets too big? To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sat, 4 Mar 1995 15:11:08 -0600 (CST) Cc: today@di.com In-Reply-To: from "Todd Day" at Mar 3, 95 10:52:00 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 4669 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > You might remember from previous posts that I run the Talon/Eclipse/Laser > list. This list is going on five years now, and is starting to get a bit > out of control. I have something like 500 people on it (pretty small > compared to some of your guys' lists, but getting large for me). I run Porschephiles, and we're at over 1300 after about 5 years. I hit most of the problems you're talking about around two years ago, and have whole 'nother pile facing me as this thing pushes towards 2000 and above... > I've gotten complaints from some of the old timers ... This is the nature of "old timers" -- they like it "like it used to be". My solution was so to get some of them involved in helping out with various aspects of list management (more on that later), and to, with deep regret and sense of loss, let some of them go their way. > Another problem is that in '95, there is a new model of the car Uh-huh. I'm supporting the same issue, in spades. Ownership on my list ranges across 45 model years, 7 major models with various sub-variants, plus the factory specials and racing cars... It's a lot harder to do just a single model in my opinion, because you *DO* have so much tighter focus. Look at the MR-2 list (for which I also run the digest) -- they have the Mk-I, Mk-II, and turbo/supercharged splits. Somehow, it works out... > 1) Split the list I thought about that, and decided not to. The issue: how do you handle distribution across topic lines?? The heading says "911" but it's really also "autocross" and "PCA events". Making sure that no one misses info that they want is a *BIG* deal -- some sort of semanticly driven infobot is what's called for. Then you have to ask yourself if it was possible to have one of them, would it be worth the extra overhead or would you just distribute a massive feed anyway and let people run their own infobots to pull out the stuff they really wanted? My stated policy is that the list won't split until I find a good clean solution for this problem. > 2) Stop the "live" feed. I wouldn't do that. I've seen too many "I'm in the middle of doing X, and need to know Y -- HELP!" messages over the years. I've also noted with some interest that a message-at-a-time feed is much easier for some of the mail readers on some of the Major On Line Services to deal with -- if you send out a digest, then everyone has to download everything, where with the right user agent, you can just tag the messages that look interesting and download them only. > I could solve the problem of heavy editing by threating to unsubscribe anyone > posting any of my pet peeves, like too much attribution and long .sigs. Automation is a BIG step forward. I put up three different filter packs: 1) trap anything that looks like subscribe/unsubscribe, or very very short messages that *could* be the above, and route to the list admin. 2) fully block messages containing certain key words and phrases This also can be used to block certain individuals from posting 3) trap anything that contains certain other key words and phrases for approval before release into the main mail reflector. I've had to yell at people for being boneheads more than a few times, but have only had to fully sanction someone ONCE. It was not pleasant. I would hope not to have to do it again. There's also a useful trick I picked up from another list I subscribe to. Getting old timers involved in doing certain things is very good -- let everyone know that Old Joe is going to answer questions about Tires and Old Bill is going to answer questions about Oil, and have them maintain FAQs. When someone asks a newbie question, everyone knows that Joe or Bill or Brad or Mark or someone is more or less the "designated hitter" for that one. They send out a private e-mail, everyone is happy. IF they discover something new or think it merits a PUBLIC response, they can do that too. The *BIG* problem is that once you clear the 1000 subscriber point, it starts to get a netnews "feel" to it -- these topics pop up that develop a life of their own like radar detectors, good cop/bad cop, speeding, etc. and you can't shut them down (unless you have a filter capability). The other big problem is resources. I had to modify a bulk mailer program that I picked up somewhere over the years to handle my message load. From a 486/25 running BSDI, I send -- on average -- 58,000 mail messages *A DAY*. Do that counting on sendmail to handle it all, and it chokes. MajorDomo turns greenish just thinking about it. Clearly a faster system would help but only masks the real issue: it's alot of work to push that much mail. Stan Hanks From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 5 12:07:41 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA00710 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 5 Mar 1995 11:39:15 -0800 Received: from mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (mycroft.greatcircle.com [198.102.244.35]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id LAA00698 for ; Sun, 5 Mar 1995 11:39:12 -0800 Received: from qvarsx.er.usgs.GOV by mycroft.GreatCircle.COM (8.6.10/SMI-4.1/Brent-950108) id JAA25530; Sun, 5 Mar 1995 09:33:43 -0800 Received: from macdgs1.er.usgs.gov (macdgs1.er.usgs.gov [130.11.52.62]) by qvarsx.er.usgs.GOV (EMAIL 1.2) with SMTP id RAA08831 for ; Sun, 5 Mar 1995 17:34:48 GMT Received: by macdgs1.er.usgs.gov (5.4R2.01/200.1.1.4) id AA13532; Sun, 5 Mar 1995 12:40:00 -0500 Date: Sun, 5 Mar 1995 12:40:00 -0500 From: rjohnson@macdgs1.er.usgs.GOV (Robert F. Johnstone) Message-Id: <9503051740.AA13532@macdgs1.er.usgs.gov> To: List-Managers@greatcircle.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk lists From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 5 17:08:16 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id RAA07199 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 5 Mar 1995 17:01:33 -0800 Received: from gw2.att.com (gw2.att.com [192.20.239.134]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id WAA14604 for ; Fri, 3 Mar 1995 22:47:33 -0800 Received: from anuxv.UUCP by ig1.att.att.com id AA12196; Fri, 3 Mar 95 15:13:28 EST Message-Id: <9503032013.AA12196@ig1.att.att.com> To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: merchant@anuxv.att.com (s.merchant) Original-To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: 3 Mar 1995 14:53 EST Subject: re: What to do when list gets too big? Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Todd Day asks: >So, what have you done with your list when the load gets too heavy and the >old timers start grumbling? Establish guidelines for postings, that are included in the "welcome" message and reposted periodically (and perhaps excerpts also mailed to frequent offenders). Here are my set of proposed guidelines for my ballroom list that I posted to the list, soliciting opinions, modifications, etc. By and large the guidelines were very well received. I also got some good suggestions for a few modifications, which are not yet incorporated into the version I'm attaching here; these included things like: - Check the FAQ if you are a new member before posting - Make the subject line descriptive Feel free to edit and use for your list if you'd like. The advantage of guidelines that are somewhat formally adopted is that you have at least a somewhat objective set of rules to point to. Furthermore, "enforcement" can be by "peer pressure"--any member of the group can send e-mail to the offender attaching the guidelines, and pointing out the violation, and that removes some of the burden from the list administrator. Unless you have a very divisive and argumentative group (which does not seem to be the case), it is unlikely that you will break out into a "rules war." Shahrukh Merchant merchant@anuxv.att.com ================================================================ [Excerpts from my mail to members of the ballroom list] THE PROBLEM =========== As many of you have noticed, the traffic on the ballroom mailing list has got to the point that it is reducing the effectiveness of the list. There are two problems with this: 1. The more important one is it drives people away from the list who don't have the time or inclination (or high-bandwidth user interfaces) to handle the volume. Based on the increasing subscription rate, there should be 500 or more members on the list. In fact, the list membership is just at around 250, which is _less than_ its high of 300+ several months ago. I see a direct correlation between the volume and unsubscription rate--many people actually send me e-mail telling me that that's why they unsubscribed. Consequently, I think we all lose out by the reduction in the number of participants (which is _not_ compensated for by the increased participation of those remaining...). In a sense, the list is victim of its own "success," if you measure success by volume of postings (though I prefer to measure it in terms of the number of subscribers and the quality of the postings). 2. Unlike a Usenet newsgroup, a mailing list--even an automated one-- requires a certain amount of personal administration, and it has become burdensome. (To give you an idea, I get about 200 messages _per day_ related to the ballroom list; there are always 2-4 addresses generating bounced mail on any day, and _each_ generates a message for _each_ message to the list.) POSSIBLE OPTIONS ================ There are a few: 1. Start up the moderated ballroom list to supplement the unmoderated one. This would address problem #1 above, but would actually exacerbate #2. 2. Make "ballroom" a moderated-only list. This would be effective, but I think many of us would miss the open forum of an unmoderated list. It would also considerably reduce the transparency of the rec.arts.dance (which would remain unmoderated) <--> ballroom list gateway. 3. Establish voluntary guidelines for mailings to the ballroom list that would reduce the volume through some common-sense suggestions without, one hopes, introducing an atmosphere of restrictiveness or censorship. I would like to try option 3 as it seems the least disruptive. Besides, many people have voiced the sentiment that there is a lot of "noise" and trivia on the list anyway, so perhaps there would be some other side benefits to these guidelines. [Some stuff deleted] PROPOSED GUIDELINES (FINALLY) ============================= [Each guideline is followed by an "editorial" on why I believe it is appropriate.] 1. RELEVANCE OF SUBJECT: Only submit articles that are related to ballroom or swing dancing or a directly related subject. There seems to be a school of thought that the list is for discussion on any subject whatsoever, as long as it is between ballroom dancers, or as long as it stemmed from a subject that originally did pertain to ballroom dancing. From day one, that has never been my intention in setting up the list--even when it was on athena.mit.edu, the description of the purpose of the list clearly stated, I think, its primary purpose. In a previous era, when the volume was low, these digressions did little harm and, one could argue, even added a certain amount of congeniality. While I certainly do not intend to imply that discussions should be limited to technical ones by any means--opinions, questions, philosophy, social dynamics, music, etc., are all fine--it should bear *some* relevance to the purpose of the list (ballroom/swing dancing). 2. BROAD INTEREST: Don't send personal replies to the entire list. The list has deliberately been configured so that replies by default do NOT go to the whole list. If you choose to override the default, please make sure that it is warranted, i.e., ask yourself if you are including information that would be of interest to the list _in general_. Even some information of general interest can be sent only to the requester, if the requester promises to post a summary (see #3). 3. ETIQUETTE WHEN ASKING QUESTIONS: Request that answers be sent directly to you, and offer to post summaries of responses. Questions are fine--the access to a large number of people who might answer them (though not necessarily consistenly :-)) is one of the biggest assets we have in the list. However, they also have the potential for generating a lot of list traffic with bits and pieces of answers. A good way to "get the best of both worlds," and also for those who ask for the information and presumably benefit from it to "return the favour" to the list, is to offer to post a summary or compilation of the information back to the list. E.g., "Where can I go ballroom dancing in Albuquerque, New Mexico? Please send e-mail responses directly to me, and I will post a summary of responses back to the list, combined with my own observations and experiences when I return. I have checked the Dancers' Archive, but couldn't find what I wanted--I will also add the new information to the Dancers' Archive file and send the update to Eileen." [Now *there's* a socially reponsible posting!] Not only does this reduce piecemeal traffic, but your compilation may make an excellent article for inclusion in the Dancers' Archives, or FAQ, or even so that other interested people can store all the pertinent information in one mail message. 4. AVOID TRIVIA: Please refrain from trivial responses (usually characterized by being 1-2 lines long). This is not to encourage you to be verbose if you can make a point concisely, but most 1-2 line responses of late have seemed rather trivial. When one is asking several hundred people to go through your message (and the dozens of lines of quoted material that typically accompanies these trivial messages), would it not behoove one to put at least a little thought into the content? Examples of trivial messages (unless accompanied by some further elaboration): "Me [sic] too!" "I'm not sure if I would agree with that." "Ha, Ha!" "I was wondering that too." These are probably appropriate if sent *just* to the original poster, but it really does little more than clutter up mailboxes if sent to the whole list. (Many _questions_ ARE 1-2 lines long and appropriately so--this guideline is not intended to apply to questions.) 5. SILENCE MAY BE GOLDEN: There is nothing wrong with a silent list. OK, that's not an absolute for ALL lists. For example, for a startup list, some continuous traffic may be desirable just so that the list achieves critical mass of membership and volume, and does not die from inactivity. It is quite safe to say that the ballroom list is in no immediate danger of suffering this fate. On the contrary, there has been an exodus of people who complain about the volume of traffic, and the entire list suffers from the loss of their participation. 6. PROLIFIC POSTERS: Don't feel that you need to respond to _every_ message on which you have an opinion. A lot of good information comes from some of the most frequent contributors, and it is not atypical that the majority of people on the list are "lurkers," and are quite happy to remain so. But sometimes one sees an abundance of messages from the same person that fall into the "trivial" category (see #4) and it is then especially annoying. One solution, if you really must add your two bits' worth to _everything_, is to assemble these responses into a file, and post it once a week. Even if you feel that you are making worthwhile and well-considered statements with every posting, try not to dominate the list with your own postings. 7. FLAMES (DON'T): Don't send flames* to the list. [*Attacks, usually personal, typically going back and forth several times between the same two people, ad nauseum.] Just send it to the person you want to insult.:-) OK, so that removes most of the "satisfaction" one gets from flaming someone in public. Disagreements and controversy are fine and even healthy. But when these degenerate into personal attacks and nitpicking, then after the first round of disagreements has been aired, nothing new of value to the list membership is usually provided, and it is only egos that are being aired, and list members' patience that are being tried. Some people like to flame-bait. Don't fall for it! 8. CONSIDERATION: Be aware of and considerate towards the _readers_. Consider that when one posts an article, one is ostensibly doing it either (i) for the benefit of the _other_ members of the list, or (ii) to gain benefit from the other members of the list. In either case, it seems that one should be considerate towards all these other people. There are many little things you can do--here is just one example: + Don't quote the entire article when mailing a follow-up note. It is rarely needed since most people have seen the original. If you must, do take the minute or two extra time to edit out all but the most pertinent part of the original article. If your own contribution is smaller than what you're quoting, you're probably quoting too much [also see Item 4: Avoid Trivia]. If your mailer does not make it easy to do this, don't subject everyone else to its limitations. Learn how to save the file, edit it separately and read it back into your reply. Some people still have 2400 baud connections to their on-line services and this can make a _big_ difference! From list-managers-owner Wed Mar 8 16:36:00 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id QAA09235 for list-managers-outgoing; Wed, 8 Mar 1995 16:23:35 -0800 Received: from wilma.cs.utk.edu (WILMA.CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.141]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id VAA26896 for ; Tue, 7 Mar 1995 21:09:27 -0800 Received: from LOCALHOST by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.11c-UTK) id AAA01304; Wed, 8 Mar 1995 00:03:49 -0500 Message-Id: <199503080503.AAA01304@wilma.cs.utk.edu> X-URI: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/ To: list-managers@greatcircle.com cc: moore@cs.utk.edu From: Keith Moore Subject: suspicious looking subscribe message points to 800 fax gateways Date: Wed, 08 Mar 1995 00:03:41 -0500 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I recieved the following subscribe message addressed to info-mime-request@cs.utk.edu. This looks suspiciously like an attempt to flood that 800 number with junk faxes (probably from lots of lists) and bill lots of calls to it. I telephoned that number and it turns out to be a doctor's office in Queens, NY. It's not even attached to a fax machine, and sure enough, they are getting lots of calls with a high-pitched beep. So you might want to check your lists and see if this same address is subscribed... Also, since the subscription itself came from a listproc, maybe the attacker was using that to cover his/her tracks? Keith Moore ------- Forwarded Message Delivery-Date: Tue, 07 Mar 1995 22:56:54 -0500 X-Folder: postmaster Return-Path: Received: from tequesta.gate.net by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id WAA11357; Tue, 7 Mar 1995 22:56:49 -0500 From: Received: from epinet.com (listproc@router.epinet.com [199.227.49.1]) by tequesta.gate.net (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA31834 for info-mime-REQUEST@cs.utk.edu; Tue, 7 Mar 1995 22:56:52 -0500 Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 22:56:52 -0500 Message-Id: <199503080356.WAA31834@tequesta.gate.net> Apparently-To: info-mime-REQUEST@cs.utk.edu subscribe ------- End of Forwarded Message From list-managers-owner Thu Mar 9 18:50:43 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id SAA05103 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 18:45:58 -0800 Received: from unicorn.swi.com.sg (unicorn.swi.com.sg [202.0.71.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id RAA10922 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 1995 17:27:11 -0800 Received: (from mathias@localhost) by unicorn.swi.com.sg (8.6.10/8.6.6) id JAA06097; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 09:19:56 +0800 Message-Id: <199503090119.JAA06097@unicorn.swi.com.sg> Subject: Re: suspicious looking subscribe message points to 800 fax gateways To: moore@cs.utk.edu (Keith Moore) Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 09:19:56 +0800 (SST) Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, moore@cs.utk.edu In-Reply-To: <199503080503.AAA01304@wilma.cs.utk.edu> from "Keith Moore" at Mar 8, 95 00:03:41 am From: Mathias.Koerber@swi.com.sg (Mathias Koerber) Reply-To: Mathias.Koerber@swi.com.sg Organization: SW International Systems Pte Ltd Disclaimer: My company pays me to work, not speak for them. So there ! X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2060 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk According to Keith Moore | I recieved the following subscribe message addressed to | info-mime-request@cs.utk.edu. This looks suspiciously like an attempt | to flood that 800 number with junk faxes (probably from lots of lists) | and bill lots of calls to it. | | I telephoned that number and it turns out to be a doctor's office in | Queens, NY. It's not even attached to a fax machine, and sure enough, | they are getting lots of calls with a high-pitched beep. | | So you might want to check your lists and see if this same address is | subscribed... Also, since the subscription itself came from a listproc, | maybe the attacker was using that to cover his/her tracks? Mayve the guys at tpc.int could be asked to weed out fax requests from mailing lists to prvent this kind of misuse. And then snd a msg to the list maintainer... chers | | Keith Moore | | ------- Forwarded Message | | Delivery-Date: Tue, 07 Mar 1995 22:56:54 -0500 | X-Folder: postmaster | Return-Path: | Received: from tequesta.gate.net by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) | id WAA11357; Tue, 7 Mar 1995 22:56:49 -0500 | From: | Received: from epinet.com (listproc@router.epinet.com [199.227.49.1]) by tequesta.gate.net (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA31834 for info-mime-REQUEST@cs.utk.edu; Tue, 7 Mar 1995 22:56:52 -0500 | Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 22:56:52 -0500 | Message-Id: <199503080356.WAA31834@tequesta.gate.net> | Apparently-To: info-mime-REQUEST@cs.utk.edu | | subscribe | | ------- End of Forwarded Message | | -- Mathias Koerber Tel: +65 / 7780066 x 29 SW International Systems Pte Ltd Fax: +65 / 7779401 14 Science Park Drive #04-01 email: Mathias.Koerber@swi.com.sg The Maxwell, Singapore Science Park S'pore 0511 MK * Eifersucht ist eine Leidenschaft, die mit Eifer sucht, was Leiden schafft * From list-managers-owner Thu Mar 9 19:21:54 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id TAA06086 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 19:11:14 -0800 Received: from ns.ge.com (ns.ge.com [192.35.39.24]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id TAA06055 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 19:11:06 -0800 Received: from [158.254.10.56] (xcrsnyder.ge_xc.dialup.net [158.254.10.56]) by ns.ge.com (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id WAA18991 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 22:08:37 -0500 X-Sender: snyderra@dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 9 Mar 1995 22:08:42 -0500 To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: snyderra@post.drexel.edu (Bob Snyder) Subject: Re: suspicious looking subscribe message points to 800 fax gateways Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 9:19 AM 3/9/95, Mathias Koerber wrote: >Mayve the guys at tpc.int could be asked to weed out fax requests from >mailing lists to prvent this kind of misuse. And then snd a msg to >the list maintainer... Except that: a) tpc.int is a group of people who have volunteered their systems to deliver faxes/pages to local phone numbers, and certainly not under any central control. b) There are legitimate reasons to want to have faxes delivered from a list. I have users where I work that require this. Intelligent fax senders should keep track of unsuccessful calls, and stop sending to a number where you get pickups without a fax machine. I doubt this will be a regular occurance (especially given that many areas aren't covered by tpc.int). If it concerns you, prevent tpc.int address from subscribing without prior approval. Bob -- Bob Snyder N2KGO MIME, PGP, RIPEM mail accepted snyderra@post.drexel.edu PGP & RIPEM keys on key servers When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl. From list-managers-owner Thu Mar 9 20:20:26 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id UAA09399 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 20:14:38 -0800 Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id UAA09394 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 20:14:34 -0800 Received: from surt.ifi.uio.no (1232@surt.ifi.uio.no [129.240.76.2]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.10/ifi2.4) id for ; Fri, 10 Mar 1995 05:12:11 +0100 From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme Received: (from kjetilho@localhost) by surt.ifi.uio.no ; Fri, 10 Mar 1995 05:12:11 +0100 Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 05:12:11 +0100 Message-Id: <199503100412.28570.surt.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-reply-to: (snyderra@post.drexel.edu) Subject: Re: suspicious looking subscribe message points to 800 fax gateways Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk [Bob Snyder] | a) tpc.int is a group of people who have volunteered their systems | to deliver faxes/pages to local phone numbers, and certainly not | under any central control. So why don't they block numbers which cost money? Aren't they easily recognizable? Not that this has anything to do with list management :-) Kjetil T. From list-managers-owner Thu Mar 9 21:50:29 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id VAA13613 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 21:22:18 -0800 Received: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU (LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.198.241]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id VAA13600 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 21:22:13 -0800 Message-Id: <199503100522.VAA13600@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from LOCALHOST by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa23223; 10 Mar 95 0:19 EST To: Kjetil Torgrim Homme cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com X-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved. X-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of the author. Subject: Re: suspicious looking subscribe message points to 800 fax gateways In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 10 Mar 1995 05:12:11 +0100." <199503100412.28570.surt.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 00:19:47 -0500 From: Chris G Demetriou Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > So why don't they block numbers which cost money? Aren't they easily > recognizable? _every_ phone call costs _someone_ something, and every fax costs the receiver something. (obviously, the folks behind tpc.int aren't calling numbers that are toll calls for them...) the point is, how do you determine which requests are "legitimate"? there are many legit. uses for faxing an 800 number, or for subscribing one's fax machine to a mailing list. Mailing list managers have a responsibility to make sure that their mailing lists aren't abused in this manner. It isn't even very hard to do... chris From list-managers-owner Thu Mar 9 21:54:44 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id VAA13656 for list-managers-outgoing; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 21:22:51 -0800 Received: from wilma.cs.utk.edu (WILMA.CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.141]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id VAA13649 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 1995 21:22:47 -0800 Received: from LOCALHOST by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.11c-UTK) id AAA04926; Fri, 10 Mar 1995 00:17:04 -0500 Message-Id: <199503100517.AAA04926@wilma.cs.utk.edu> X-URI: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/ From: Keith Moore To: Kjetil Torgrim Homme cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com, moore@cs.utk.edu Subject: Re: suspicious looking subscribe message points to 800 fax gateways In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 10 Mar 1995 05:12:11 +0100." <199503100412.28570.surt.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 00:16:57 -0500 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >| a) tpc.int is a group of people who have volunteered their systems >| to deliver faxes/pages to local phone numbers, and certainly not >| under any central control. > > So why don't they block numbers which cost money? Aren't they easily > recognizable? Calls to numbers with the U.S. 800 area code are billed to the called party. That's why the subscribe request looked suspicious. Lots of places have 800 numbers for their fax machines so that their customers can send them faxes for free. But it doesn't make much sense to have the info-mime mailing list faxed to your 800 number (where you have to pay for the call) when you could probably get them for free using a different number. (It makes even less sense if there's no fax machine at that number...) At any rate, the people who manage the TPC.INT domain have since blocked faxes from the Internet to that particular 800 number. I only mentioned it on list-managers because I had reason to believe that the same number was being subscribed to other lists also, and I wanted to stop or limit the abuse as quickly as possible. Keith From list-managers-owner Fri Mar 10 19:22:30 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id SAA01285 for list-managers-outgoing; Fri, 10 Mar 1995 18:53:49 -0800 Received: from shell1.best.com (shell1.best.com [204.156.128.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id SAA01280 for ; Fri, 10 Mar 1995 18:53:47 -0800 Received: (frugal@localhost) by shell1.best.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) id SAA20784; Fri, 10 Mar 1995 18:51:14 -0800 Date: Fri, 10 Mar 1995 18:51:14 -0800 (PST) From: Linda Henneman To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: List Moderation and Profanity In-Reply-To: <199503101618.KAA03184@crasher1.ttgcitn.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Pardon me if this road has been trod down many times before but, as someone who is planning to launch a fully-moderated list very soon, I was wondering how people decide what to let through when confronted w/something that contains vulgar language? Of course, defining what is vulgar or not varies from person to person, but does anyone have any guidelines or can share w/me what they do/have done? I know from other moderated lists I'm on that certain messages don't get posted to the list because they're off the topic or repetitious or for rather benign reasons like that. So, I don't really think it's a first amendment issue. They can say what they like elsewhere maybe, but just not on my list. Sort of like the newspaper won't print certain things even if you do have a paid subscription to it. I've also seen that when someone is vulgar they draw many flames on (and probably off) the list so it's not something other people welcome. I'd like to spare my subscribers the exposure but am not really into being "big brother" and heavy w/the censoring, either. TIA for any info. Linda From list-managers-owner Sat Mar 11 04:20:21 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id DAA15068 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 03:53:37 -0800 Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id DAA15063 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 03:53:34 -0800 Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.8.1/Spike-8-1.0) id GAA12378; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 06:51:14 -0500 Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA17842; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 06:51:19 -0500 Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 06:51:19 +0001 (EST) From: Sharon Shea Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity To: Linda Henneman Cc: 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 > Pardon me if this road has been trod down many times before but, as > someone who is planning to launch a fully-moderated list very soon, I was > wondering how people decide what to let through when confronted > w/something that contains vulgar language? Of course, defining what is > vulgar or not varies from person to person, but does anyone have any > guidelines or can share w/me what they do/have done? > I found that vulgar language did a lot of damage to my 'unmoderated' list. I asked politely, then deleted the offender. I let any comment on any issue go by - except personal attacks and vulgar language. I explained that it was like inviting people to a party at my house - I sure hoped they had a good time, but being genuinely offensive was out of order. I stuck with this and I'm glad I did. I got some 'fascist pig' and 'freedom of speech' comments, but I didn't buy it. -Sharon From list-managers-owner Sat Mar 11 10:20:24 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id JAA19453 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 09:57:20 -0800 Received: from shell1.best.com (shell1.best.com [204.156.128.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id JAA19448 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 09:57:17 -0800 Received: from [204.156.141.133] (agoodloe.vip.best.com [204.156.141.133]) by shell1.best.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) with SMTP id JAA03584 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 09:54:39 -0800 Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 09:54:39 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: agoodloe@best.com (Amy Goodloe) Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >> Pardon me if this road has been trod down many times before but, as >> someone who is planning to launch a fully-moderated list very soon, I was >> wondering how people decide what to let through when confronted >> w/something that contains vulgar language? Of course, defining what is >> vulgar or not varies from person to person, but does anyone have any >> guidelines or can share w/me what they do/have done? >> >I found that vulgar language did a lot of damage to my 'unmoderated' list. >I asked politely, then deleted the offender. I let any comment on any >issue go by - except personal attacks and vulgar language. I explained that >it was like inviting people to a party at my house - I sure hoped they >had a good time, but being genuinely offensive was out of order. I have a similar concern. There is someone who is subscribed to one of my lists who is clearl NOT welcome on the list; the list policies state as much and he has been told privately twice. The problem is that I can't seem to unsubscribe him, as his address does not appear to be listed in the majordomo listmember file. I've tried searching for as many variations as possible, but I can't seem to figure out HOW he's getting list mail -- b/c it must be under a name that IS on the list; otherwise he wouldn't be "allowed" by majordomo to post to it. I've gotten notes from a few subscribers telling me about what this guy has done on other lists, and I'm quite sure he knows he isn't welcome on this list and has deliberately made it tough to track down his subscribed address. Any ideas on how I CAN track it down, or on what to do? The list is currently not moderated, but I suppose if all else fails I *could* just make it moderated... Thanks, --Amy agoodloe@best.com From list-managers-owner Sat Mar 11 11:20:27 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA21016 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 11:12:21 -0800 Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uumail3.netcom.com [163.179.3.53]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id LAA21011 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 11:12:19 -0800 Received: from znyx.com by netcomsv.netcom.com with SMTP (8.6.9/SMI-4.1) id LAA10678; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 11:09:15 -0800 Received: from alan.znyx.com by znyx.com (5.65/1.35) id AA03079; Sat, 11 Mar 95 11:14:43 -0800 Date: Sat, 11 Mar 95 11:14:43 -0800 Message-Id: <9503111914.AA03079@znyx.com> X-Sender: alan@znyx.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: alan@znyx.com (Alan Deikman) Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Sharon Wrote: >Linda Wrote: >> I was >> wondering how people decide what to let through when confronted >> w/something that contains vulgar language? Of course, defining what is >> vulgar or not varies from person to person, but does anyone have any >> guidelines or can share w/me what they do/have done? I really don't think you need guidelines. If you have to get down to that level you have already lost the war. A subscriber who is so out of touch, lacking of perspective, or just plain too stoopid to understand basic good manners over e-mail doesn't need to be on your list. "I don't know what obscenity is, but I sure know it when I see it." If that's good enough for the Supreme Court justice who said it (I think it was Reinquist?) I should be good enough for an Internet mailing list manager. >I found that vulgar language did a lot of damage to my 'unmoderated' list. >I asked politely, then deleted the offender. I let any comment on any >issue go by - except personal attacks and vulgar language. I explained that >it was like inviting people to a party at my house - I sure hoped they >had a good time, but being genuinely offensive was out of order. Good call, sharon, that's exactly the way I think of my list. Let them go to USENET if they think peeing in the house plants is funny. Point out to them (if you care to) that at least 50% of the reason that you have a private mailing list instead of a USENET news group is to avoid such antics. >I stuck with this and I'm glad I did. I got some 'fascist pig' and >'freedom of speech' comments, but I didn't buy it. You toltarian despot, you. Just out of curiosity (and if you happen to know) did the name caller(s) ever generate a posting that you thought was a worthwhile contribution? Or did anything that caused you to respect them? Another question for both Sharon and Linda: what are the mailing lists you run? My list (the pci-sig) so far has posted over 400 messages without anything remotely objectionable. Is there some category of list that is more prone to this kind of problem than another? Reagrds, -------------------------------- Alan Deikman, ZNYX Corporation alan@znyx.com From list-managers-owner Sat Mar 11 12:20:35 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id MAA21751 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 12:18:34 -0800 Received: from shell1.best.com (shell1.best.com [204.156.128.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id MAA21746 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 12:18:32 -0800 Received: from [204.156.141.133] (agoodloe.vip.best.com [204.156.141.133]) by shell1.best.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) with SMTP id MAA09212; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 12:15:44 -0801 Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 12:15:44 -0801 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: alan@znyx.com (Alan Deikman), list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: agoodloe@best.com (Amy Goodloe) Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 11:14 AM 3/11/95, Alan Deikman wrote: >Another question for both Sharon and Linda: what are the mailing lists >you run? My list (the pci-sig) so far has posted over 400 messages without >anything remotely objectionable. Is there some category of list that is >more prone to this kind of problem than another? I can answer that one: any list with the words woman, women, gay, lesbian, queer, dyke or feminist in the titles are OPEN SEASON for idiots -- and all seven of my lists have at least ONE of those words in their titles... --Amy From list-managers-owner Sat Mar 11 13:20:28 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id NAA22092 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 13:06:50 -0800 Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uumail2.netcom.com [163.179.3.52]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id NAA22087 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 13:06:47 -0800 Received: from znyx.com by netcomsv.netcom.com with SMTP (8.6.9/SMI-4.1) id NAA28222; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 13:03:42 -0800 Received: from alan.znyx.com by znyx.com (5.65/1.35) id AA03292; Sat, 11 Mar 95 13:09:12 -0800 Date: Sat, 11 Mar 95 13:09:12 -0800 Message-Id: <9503112109.AA03292@znyx.com> X-Sender: alan@znyx.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, agoodloe@best.com (Amy Goodloe) From: alan@znyx.com (Alan Deikman) Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Amy Goodloe: >I can answer that one: any list with the words woman, women, gay, lesbian, >queer, dyke or feminist in the titles are OPEN SEASON for idiots -- and all >seven of my lists have at least ONE of those words in their titles... Aw, gee wizz. I guess, contrary to my expectation, that the PCI bus doesn't after all stimulate the most primal urges instincts of human kind. I can see where your lists would have problems in this area. You are dealing with sexual topics, and all the maggots will crawl out from their respective rocks to have their say, to be noticed for once in their lives, particularly by the opposite sex. I'll bet even odds that 99.9% of your offenders are males, who have problems with women, right? And most of the other .1% are still males using a female e-mail moniker. You might say that the maggots are simply part of the soil you have chosen to work, Amy. But that's what makes it interesting, no? I'll stick to circuits and wave-forms, thank you. Regards, -------------------------------- Alan Deikman, ZNYX Corporation alan@znyx.com From list-managers-owner Sat Mar 11 13:50:26 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id NAA22305 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 13:28:54 -0800 Received: from relay2.UU.NET (relay2.UU.NET [192.48.96.7]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id NAA22300 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 13:28:51 -0800 Received: from world.std.com by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP id QQygqn15166; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 16:24:00 -0500 Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA02481; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 16:22:51 -0500 Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 16:22:50 +0001 (EST) From: Sharon Shea Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity To: Amy Goodloe Cc: Alan Deikman , 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 > > I can answer that one: any list with the words woman, women, gay, lesbian, > queer, dyke or feminist in the titles are OPEN SEASON for idiots -- and all > seven of my lists have at least ONE of those words in their titles... > Yup...my list is 'women'...;-) From list-managers-owner Sat Mar 11 14:50:24 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id OAA23500 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 14:23:24 -0800 Received: from shell1.best.com (shell1.best.com [204.156.128.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id OAA23495 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 14:23:22 -0800 Received: from [204.156.141.133] (agoodloe.vip.best.com [204.156.141.133]) by shell1.best.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) with SMTP id OAA15104 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 14:20:47 -0801 Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 14:20:47 -0801 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@greatcircle.com From: agoodloe@best.com (Amy Goodloe) Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk bill@biome.bio.dfo.ca (Bill Silvert) writes: >Have you checked the headers on the mail carefully? The address of the >poster normally appears there, although it may not show up when you >display the message through some mailers. Yes. I use Eudora, and can choose to see full headers -- which gives me no more info other than what I already know: his email address. >Are you sure that non-members cannot post? MJ can be configured this >way, but it is not the default. Ok, say my list is called fun-list@here.com. In the config file, under restricted post, I should just type: fun-list right? to make majordomo check the poster's address against who's in the fun-list subscriber list?? That's what I've done, but please let me know if that isn't right!! --Amy From list-managers-owner Sat Mar 11 14:53:34 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id OAA23953 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 14:40:53 -0800 Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id OAA23948 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 14:40:50 -0800 Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.8.1/Spike-8-1.0) id RAA10862; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 17:38:35 -0500 Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA08100; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 17:38:35 -0500 Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 17:38:35 +0001 (EST) From: Sharon Shea Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity To: Alan Deikman Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, Amy Goodloe In-Reply-To: <9503112109.AA03292@znyx.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > I can see where your lists would have problems in this area. You are > dealing with sexual topics, and all the maggots will crawl out from their > respective rocks to have their say, to be noticed for once in their lives, particularly by the opposite sex. I'll bet even odds that 99.9% of > your offenders are males, who have problems with women, right? And most > of the other .1% are still males using a female e-mail moniker. Yup, some are men. And there is a problem with men using women's email. But I've found some women to be particularly hostile and vulgar - toward women! - as well. And women who masquerade as men get themselves into hot water also. Administrate an email list - and you'll meet them all. BTW, I have seen some amazingly harsh exchanges on very 'professional' lists. You're on target that there's lot of 'sexual attention' nonsense out there, but I've run into more than a few who have a real problem with anyone they feel is an 'authority figure.' I had one fellow(?) rip me up all over the internet as being 'single-handedly responsible for the demise of feminism and free speach'. Ah, yeah, sure. He just 'arrived' on the list - I don't think he'd ever seen a message from me since I rarely get into the discussions. Just decided to hang me up for being in charge, I suspect. Tracking this fellow determined that he 'arrived' by email to pounce on people routinely. (Turns out those who knew him personaly said he was a very quite, very low-life sort offline. Got his kicks by online attacks.) -Sharon From list-managers-owner Sat Mar 11 19:20:24 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id TAA28849 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 19:12:04 -0800 Received: from gagme.wwa.com (gagme.wwa.com [198.49.174.33]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id TAA28843 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 19:11:58 -0800 Received: by gagme.wwa.com (Smail3.1.28.1 #8) id m0rne6k-000FCZC; Sat, 11 Mar 95 21:14 CST Message-Id: From: dattier@wwa.com (David W. Tamkin) Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity To: sshea@world.std.com (Sharon Shea) Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 21:14:17 -0600 (CST) Cc: alan@znyx.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, agoodloe@best.com In-Reply-To: from "Sharon Shea" at Mar 11, 95 05:38:35 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 750 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Sharon Shea wrote, | I had one fellow(?) rip me up all over the internet as being | 'single-handedly responsible for the demise of feminism and free speach'. | Ah, yeah, sure. He just 'arrived' on the list - I don't think he'd ever | seen a message from me since I rarely get into the discussions. Just | decided to hang me up for being in charge, I suspect. The lists I've run have never had problems with profanity, but on two of the three I've been attacked just because a jerk decided that all list managers perforce have the same stuck-up power made that the jerk would have if he or she (yes, "or she") ran a list. The higher visibility makes the list adminis- trator the easiest target around for flamage over things that never happened. From list-managers-owner Sat Mar 11 19:24:56 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id TAA28672 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 19:06:02 -0800 Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uumail2.netcom.com [163.179.3.52]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id TAA28666 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 19:05:58 -0800 Received: from znyx.com by netcomsv.netcom.com with SMTP (8.6.9/SMI-4.1) id TAA18347; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 19:01:38 -0800 Received: from alan.znyx.com by znyx.com (5.65/1.35) id AA03964; Sat, 11 Mar 95 19:07:12 -0800 Date: Sat, 11 Mar 95 19:07:12 -0800 Message-Id: <9503120307.AA03964@znyx.com> X-Sender: alan@znyx.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Sharon Shea From: alan@znyx.com (Alan Deikman) Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, Amy Goodloe Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Sharon, >Yup, some are men. And there is a problem with men using women's email. >But I've found some women to be particularly hostile and vulgar - toward >women! - as well. And women who masquerade as men get themselves into hot >water also. Administrate an email list - and you'll meet them all. I guess I would have lost my bet. Most of the complaints I see about hostility seem to be about "the boys." From what you are telling me it seems that the insulating attributes of Internet e-mail (real or perceived) would allow women to be more agressive than they would normally be inclined to in a physical situation. You can see similar types of behavior in automobile traffic. Something happens to people when they get behind the wheel. The same person who would politely usher you into the elevator in front of them will go fully ballistic if they think you've encroached on "their" lane. Even if there were no safety issue involved. >I had one fellow(?) rip me up all over the internet as being >'single-handedly responsible for the demise of feminism and free speach'. Wow. Gives you a real sense of power, doesn't it? >Tracking this fellow determined that he 'arrived' by email to pounce on >people routinely. (Turns out those who knew him personaly said he was a >very quite, very low-life sort offline. Got his kicks by online attacks.) Hmm. Fortunately, most such types don't have enough physical courage to show up on your doorstep, or stalk you. I have never heard of this happening, but there was a recent case of a USENET poster posting a violent rape/pornographic story with a real person named by name as the victim. I know if I were her, I would be really upset, and worried that if this guy was thinking such things would he or another guy be inspired to implement them? This is scary. I wonder if anyone besides myself would see a value in keeping and accessing a private list of such individuals. I would be willing to maintain and disperse this data-base for known list managers. I would take contributions that would help track these guys and help keep them from becoming a problem. The point would not be to "blacklist" anyone but to keep an impartial record for use by list managers, particularly if they might have to get the authorities involved. Amy, Sharon, Linda, would you participate? Regards, -------------------------------- Alan Deikman, ZNYX Corporation alan@znyx.com From list-managers-owner Sat Mar 11 20:50:30 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id UAA00375 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 20:32:57 -0800 Received: from UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU (UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU [129.7.1.11]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id UAA00370 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 20:32:53 -0800 Received: from Taronga.COM by UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU with UUCP id AA28993 (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for greatcircle.com!list-managers); Sat, 11 Mar 1995 22:08:36 -0600 Received: by bonkers.taronga.com (smail2.5p) id AA01233; 11 Mar 95 22:07:10 CST (Sat) Received: (from arielle@localhost) by bonkers.taronga.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) id WAA01230 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 22:07:10 -0600 From: Stephanie da Silva Message-Id: <199503120407.WAA01230@bonkers.taronga.com> Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 22:07:10 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 529 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > The point would not be to "blacklist" anyone > but to keep an impartial record for use by list managers, particularly > if they might have to get the authorities involved. Amy, Sharon, Linda, > would you participate? I don't really think this is necessary. On the subject of profanity, it doesn't bother me if it's not abusive. Though it hasn't really been a problem on my list. I can't say that, as nothing's been much of a problem on my list because it's moderated. Guess that's why I go to the trouble of moderating. From list-managers-owner Sat Mar 11 20:52:29 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id UAA00318 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 20:26:52 -0800 Received: from usis.com (usis.com [199.171.178.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id UAA00313 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 20:26:47 -0800 Received: from siberia.usis.com (siberia.usis.com [199.171.178.71]) by usis.com (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id WAA06658 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 22:20:37 -0600 Message-Id: <199503120420.WAA06658@usis.com> From: "Kimberly Long" Organization: usis To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 22:21:11 +0000 Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity Reply-to: siberia@usis.com Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail/Windows (v1.22) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk alan@znyx.com (Alan Deikman) wrote in part: > I wonder if anyone besides myself would see a value in keeping and > accessing a private list of such individuals. I would be willing to > maintain and disperse this data-base for known list managers. I would > take contributions that would help track these guys and help keep them > from becoming a problem. The point would not be to "blacklist" anyone > but to keep an impartial record for use by list managers, particularly > if they might have to get the authorities involved. Amy, Sharon, Linda, > would you participate? I don't know. This makes me uncomfortable. First of all, anyone that is actively involved in the internet will eventually figure out the "hard-core" trouble makers. The net may be appear to be a big place, but in my experience, it really isn't. Keeping an "impartial record" seems too power-trippy to me as well as ineffective. There is nothing to keep a crazed person from closing one net account down and within 5 minutes getting another. It seems to me that we should be dealing with the mechanics of the problem, i.e., how to keep a closed list closed. I cannot understand why anyone would not want to keep their list open to non-subscriber postings. Is there something I am missing? Namaste' Kimberly Long siberia@usis.com If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music he hears, however measured or far away. )O( ~~Thoreau From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 00:20:21 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id XAA02833 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 23:52:40 -0800 Received: from shell1.best.com (shell1.best.com [204.156.128.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id XAA02827 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 23:52:38 -0800 Received: from [204.156.141.133] (agoodloe.vip.best.com [204.156.141.133]) by shell1.best.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) with SMTP id XAA12484; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 23:50:01 -0800 Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 23:50:01 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: siberia@usis.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: agoodloe@best.com (Amy Goodloe) Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk At 10:21 PM 3/11/95, Kimberly Long wrote: >I cannot understand why anyone would not want to keep their list open >to non-subscriber postings. Is there something I am missing? I can't understand why anyone WOULD want their lists open to non-subscriber postings (is that what you meant?) I can't believe its the default in the current version of majordomo to have lists open to random posts -- that seems rather, well, dumb. But I also can't understand why it isn't harder for outsiders to figure out the outgoing mail alias (I mean listname-outgoing IS fairly obvious...) --amy From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 01:50:24 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id BAA04430 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 01:42:07 -0800 Received: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU (LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.198.241]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id BAA04425 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 01:42:05 -0800 Message-Id: <199503120942.BAA04425@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa09347; 12 Mar 95 4:39 EST To: Sharon Shea cc: Alan Deikman , list-managers@greatcircle.com, Amy Goodloe X-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved. X-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of the author. Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 11 Mar 1995 17:38:35 +0001." Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 04:39:17 -0500 From: Chris G Demetriou Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > Yup, some are men. And there is a problem with men using women's email. > But I've found some women to be particularly hostile and vulgar - toward > women! - as well. And women who masquerade as men get themselves into hot > water also. Administrate an email list - and you'll meet them all. Thankfully, i don't run lists where the posters' gender and assumed gender don't come up often... 8-) > BTW, I have seen some amazingly harsh exchanges on very 'professional' lists. Yeah. i think this is especially likely if one or more of the people on the list who have reason to send mail to it often are either immature in their reactions to people's posts or brief to the point of insulting the people they're responding to... Since majordomo's written perl, it's really easy (a few lines of perl, at most; see below) to add keyword matches to "resend" so that abusive mail is filtered out and bounced to the list owner. In general, i'm not of the opinion that the words "fuck" and "asshole" are appropriate for technical, computer-oriented lists, and i have no qualms about bouncing messages containing them. 8-) the chunk of perl to do it looks like: if (defined($opt_s) && ! defined($approved) && ( /\bfuck\b/i || /\basshole\b/i )) { &bounce("Keyword match"); } and we (actually, the guy who now runs the majordomo that serves our lists) added it right after the "admin-request recognition heuristics" section in "resend". Obviously, if your list gets a lot of traffic with those two words in it, you'll need to change it so it's a better heuristic for abuse, but that should give you the idea... later, chris From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 02:20:53 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id CAA04937 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 02:15:17 -0800 Received: from shell1.best.com (shell1.best.com [204.156.128.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id CAA04932 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 02:15:14 -0800 Received: (frugal@localhost) by shell1.best.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) id CAA05340; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 02:12:37 -0800 Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 02:12:36 -0800 (PST) From: Linda Henneman To: Alan Deikman cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity In-Reply-To: <9503111914.AA03079@znyx.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Alan, thanks for the info. I haven't even launched my list yet so haven't gotten any posts, but was just trying to plan how to head off trouble if it reared its ugly head. My list, BTW, is called "FRUGAL-L" and is about frugal living geared toward urban renters. Shouldn't think that would attract a lot of jerks attired in asbestos suits but, who knows. . .? Linda Henneman (frugal@best.com) On Sat, 11 Mar 1995, Alan Deikman wrote: > Another question for both Sharon and Linda: what are the mailing lists > you run? My list (the pci-sig) so far has posted over 400 messages without > anything remotely objectionable. Is there some category of list that is > more prone to this kind of problem than another? > > Reagrds, > > > > -------------------------------- > Alan Deikman, ZNYX Corporation > alan@znyx.com > From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 02:22:34 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id CAA04855 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 02:08:39 -0800 Received: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU (LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.198.241]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id CAA04850 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 02:08:35 -0800 Message-Id: <199503121008.CAA04850@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa09403; 12 Mar 95 5:05 EST To: Amy Goodloe cc: siberia@usis.com, list-managers@greatcircle.com X-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved. X-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of the author. Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 11 Mar 1995 23:50:01 PST." Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 05:05:39 -0500 From: Chris G Demetriou Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > >I cannot understand why anyone would not want to keep their list open > >to non-subscriber postings. Is there something I am missing? > > I can't understand why anyone WOULD want their lists open to non-subscriber > postings (is that what you meant?) I can't believe its the default in the > current version of majordomo to have lists open to random posts -- that > seems rather, well, dumb. For most lists, it causes no harm (great) to allow people to send to the list without subscribing. the only real problems with it (that i can think of 8-) are: (1) SPAM!, (2) idiots being jerks, and (3) newbies asking stupid questions without being informed of the FAQ, or whatever. Usually (2) can be taken care of with reasonable pointers to FAQs wherever the mailing lists are advertised. On the other hand, there are benefits to having "open-posting" lists: (1) allows people who have a quick question that isn't easily answered by list archives or a FAQ to ask it, and not get completely swamped by (for the) irrelevant mail. (This is especially true for high-volume lists.) (2) allows people who have a "floating" e-mail address to use the list reasonably... (for instance, i send most of my mail from here (lagavulin), but often from other machines, and most of the mailing lists i'm subscribed to are subscribed to my berkeley.edu addresses... 8-) If you restrict postings to people who are subscribed, this becomes harder to deal with properly. all of the lists i run (22, or so, at last count) are "open posting." (Interesting, _not_ all are open subscription, but even the one that isn't is open to all posters...) > But I also can't understand why it isn't harder > for outsiders to figure out the outgoing mail alias (I mean > listname-outgoing IS fairly obvious...) Especially since it may be in the mail headers of your outgoing mail! e.g.: Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id XAA02833 for list-managers-outgoing; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 23:52:40 -0800 in the message that i'm replying to. I think the big stroke of luck is that (with a few exceptions) the people most likely to abuse mailing lists are also those least likely to actually know what the headers are telling them. 8-) In any case: The presence in the headers can be dealt with (at worst by hacking sendmail; i dunno what all the relevant options are). The "-outgoing" name is just a convention; you can set it up to use whatever you'd like (assuming your admin is amenable). To keep outsiders from finding the new outgoing address, you could disable EXPNs. Or, if that's not reasonable and you (or they) are willing to hack the sendmail.cf on your machine, you can get the incoming list archive to get pointed to someplace where the outgoing list name is not obvious. (I don't know how standard this is, but) we point the incoming mail to a special mail delivery rule, with sendmail, and have it figure out the right outgoing name and use that. It's not drop-dead-simple to get the security (in terms of subscription, finding out who's on the list, posting to the list, etc.) that a "sensitive" list requires, but it's definitely not too hard... It's definitely worth noting that if you're running a "sensitive" list, and you're really concerned about its traffic being monitored or its users being discovered, it's probably a bad idea to be running it on a "shared" machine, e.g. a machine owned by a big shell-account provider. Given that you or a trusted individual would be running the machine, there should be no problem arranging for all the sendmail hacks necessary to make the mailing list secure. 8-) chris From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 05:50:20 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id FAA07626 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 05:49:05 -0800 Received: from usis.com (usis.com [199.171.178.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id FAA07621 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 05:49:02 -0800 Received: from siberia.usis.com (siberia.usis.com [199.171.178.71]) by usis.com (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id HAA20563; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 07:42:47 -0600 Message-Id: <199503121342.HAA20563@usis.com> From: "Kimberly Long" Organization: usis To: agoodloe@best.com (Amy Goodloe) Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 07:43:18 +0000 Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity Reply-to: siberia@usis.com CC: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail/Windows (v1.22) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk agoodloe@best.com (Amy Goodloe) wrote in part: > At 10:21 PM 3/11/95, Kimberly Long wrote: > > >I cannot understand why anyone would not want to keep their list open > >to non-subscriber postings. Is there something I am missing? > > I can't understand why anyone WOULD want their lists open to non-subscriber > postings (is that what you meant?) Erp! You are correct, that is what I meant. Thanks for recognizing my train of thought which can be rather difficult at times (even for me). ;-) Namaste' Kimberly Long siberia@usis.com If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music he hears, however measured or far away. )O( ~~Thoreau From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 07:20:21 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id HAA08914 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 07:07:32 -0800 Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id HAA08909 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 07:07:30 -0800 Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.11/Spike-8-1.0) id KAA14942; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 10:01:41 -0500 Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA11581; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 10:01:38 -0500 Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 10:01:37 +0001 (EST) From: Sharon Shea Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity To: "David W. Tamkin" Cc: alan@znyx.com, list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, agoodloe@best.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 > > three I've been attacked just because a jerk decided that all list managers > perforce have the same stuck-up power made that the jerk would have if he or > she (yes, "or she") ran a list. The higher visibility makes the list adminis- > trator the easiest target around for flamage over things that never happened. > I think there are two issues. List managers will indeed occasionally get blasted just because they are 'available' (on the net) and 'in charge' (of a list). Either men or women cause problems here. These people have been on the list awhile, but develop a sense of entitlement. The other sorts are more often men, who go 'hunting' to cause trouble on lists. I am surely no man-hostile person (refuse to bounce them off my list) but this is what I've experienced. I have found men helpful in dealing with 'problem men' - 'problem women' are another matter. -Sharon From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 07:21:54 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id GAA08689 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 06:52:30 -0800 Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [192.74.137.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id GAA08684 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 06:52:27 -0800 Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.6.11/Spike-8-1.0) id JAA14316; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 09:47:11 -0500 Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA07122; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 09:47:08 -0500 Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 09:47:08 +0001 (EST) From: Sharon Shea Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity To: Alan Deikman Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM, Amy Goodloe In-Reply-To: <9503120307.AA03964@znyx.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > > I guess I would have lost my bet. Most of the complaints I see about > hostility seem to be about "the boys." From what you are telling me > it seems that the insulating attributes of Internet e-mail (real or > perceived) would allow women to be more agressive than they would > normally be inclined to in a physical situation. > I think that net-wide, most are 'boys.' They will show up all sorts of places they aren't welcome with their attitude. But women will get nasty with a group that they already know. (Keep in mind this is anecdotal! I havent' done a study on this - yet.) > > Hmm. Fortunately, most such types don't have enough physical courage > to show up on your doorstep, or stalk you. I have never heard of this > happening, but there was a recent case of a USENET poster posting a > violent rape/pornographic story with a real person named by name as > the victim. I know if I were her, I would be really upset, and worried > that if this guy was thinking such things would he or another guy > be inspired to implement them? This is scary. Actually, I have had to call the authorities. Someone who was thoroughly hostile on the net did make a local population of women nervous. As you mentioned, he wasn't probably physically dangerous in person, but he had such an aggresive, sexually hostile email manner, that those he had contacted personally on my list did request police protection. I did call for them. > > I wonder if anyone besides myself would see a value in keeping and > accessing a private list of such individuals. I would be willing to > maintain and disperse this data-base for known list managers. I would > take contributions that would help track these guys and help keep them > from becoming a problem. The point would not be to "blacklist" anyone > but to keep an impartial record for use by list managers, particularly > if they might have to get the authorities involved. Amy, Sharon, Linda, > would you participate? > Yes. I would be real, real cautious about it. But there have been a couple of totally hostile types that it would be good to know about if they are giving lists trouble. Perhaps it might be a 'low-profile' way to deal with these people. It might be less problem (but indeed more effective) to send a message like 'gee, we see you give lists trouble routinely' than calling out the cops. I think these sorts do what they do because they are sure there is no one 'net-watching' them. -Sharon From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 10:50:20 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id KAA10464 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 10:33:00 -0800 Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id KAA10459 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 10:32:56 -0800 Received: from surt.ifi.uio.no (1232@surt.ifi.uio.no [129.240.76.2]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.10/ifi2.4) id for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 19:30:40 +0100 From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme Received: (from kjetilho@localhost) by surt.ifi.uio.no ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 19:30:39 +0100 Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 19:30:39 +0100 Message-Id: <199503121830.6778.surt.ifi.uio.no@ifi.uio.no> To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM In-reply-to: <199503120420.WAA06658@usis.com> (siberia@usis.com) Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk One reason to keep the list open to non-subscribers is gateways. The sysadmins here urge people to use the Usenet mirrors rather than subscribing ourselves (they are pretty responsive about creating new ones as they are needed). The mirrors are one-way, so I'd have to send mail to say linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu rather than post to fa.linux.kernel. However, it would be easy to extend Majordomo and other packages to keep a separate list of approved posters. It might even be a subset of the subscribers in some cases! A new command, "participate", perhaps? "subscribe" should implicitly mean "participate", of course. Since the list of participants is only used for checking, it doesn't matter whether addresses in it grow stale, so it should mean little or no extra hassle for the list manager. Kjetil T. PS. Please remember to use the majordomo list for majordomo-specific issues in response to this. From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 10:53:14 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id KAA10473 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 10:33:28 -0800 Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uumail3.netcom.com [163.179.3.53]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id KAA10468 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 10:33:26 -0800 Received: from znyx.com by netcomsv.netcom.com with SMTP (8.6.9/SMI-4.1) id KAA13913; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 10:30:23 -0800 Received: from alan.znyx.com by znyx.com (5.65/1.35) id AA08156; Sun, 12 Mar 95 10:36:06 -0800 Date: Sun, 12 Mar 95 10:36:06 -0800 Message-Id: <9503121836.AA08156@znyx.com> X-Sender: alan@znyx.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Chris G Demetriou From: alan@znyx.com (Alan Deikman) Subject: Abuse problem is not treatable by Software Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >In general, i'm >not of the opinion that the words "fuck" and "asshole" are appropriate >for technical, computer-oriented lists, and i have no qualms about >bouncing messages containing them. 8-) > >the chunk of perl to do it looks like: The problem, Chris, with these types of solutions is that they invite further attack and do nothing, really, to solve the problem. Your post, and mine, would be bounced by the perl script you suggested, even though there is nothing objectionable in either. I have seen a lot of net.abusers that would take great delight in discovering ways to get around it with a vengance (being challenged) by posting such things as "XYZ is a phuqehead and an anushole..." You get the idea. The only real solution is to get these p-heads and a-holes off your list as quickly as possible. The trick is identifying them. Regards, -------------------------------- Alan Deikman, ZNYX Corporation alan@znyx.com From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 11:20:26 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA10920 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 11:14:00 -0800 Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uumail2.netcom.com [163.179.3.52]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id LAA10915 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 11:13:57 -0800 Received: from znyx.com by netcomsv.netcom.com with SMTP (8.6.9/SMI-4.1) id LAA00668; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 11:10:53 -0800 Received: from alan.znyx.com by znyx.com (5.65/1.35) id AA08237; Sun, 12 Mar 95 11:16:41 -0800 Date: Sun, 12 Mar 95 11:16:41 -0800 Message-Id: <9503121916.AA08237@znyx.com> X-Sender: alan@znyx.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Sharon Shea From: alan@znyx.com (Alan Deikman) Subject: Proposed Trouble Data Base Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >> Amy, Sharon, Linda, would you participate? Amy wrote: >I'm not so sure it would be useful to me, b/c the people likely to be >giving me trouble wouldn't be the same kind giving others trouble -- the >reasons and just about everything else would be different. But I WOULD >appreciate it if someone would develop a better way of keeping unwanted >people OFF my lists, without me having to resort to making them moderated The trick to keeping them off your list is principally identifying them. Policy is up to a list manager, yourself. Sharon wrote: >Yes. I would be real, real cautious about it. Absolutely positively. Caution is what my suggestion is all about, and low profile is definitely the way to go. What I am suggesting is that several list-managers who know each other get together to share information by private e-mail. The last thing you want is this information to be known to the net in general. Kimberly wrote: >I don't know. This makes me uncomfortable. First of all, anyone >that is actively involved in the internet will eventually figure out >the "hard-core" trouble makers. The net may be appear to be a big >place, but in my experience, it really isn't. I think I know what you mean, but I saw an article in the SJ murky news this morning that listed the on-line services that provide over four million individuals access to the Internet. Stephanie's directory of lists is available to all of them. It isn't the ones that you know that are the problem, its the ones you don't know. >Keeping an "impartial record" seems too power-trippy to me as well as >ineffective. Maybe it is power-trippy. So what? I just know that I was considering opening some new lists and decided not to because I can't afford to have any controversy associated with my company's name just now. I very rarely post to USENET for the same reason. The way that I would envision this working is as follows: List Manager X sees some questionable postings from a given address. A note to the source doesn't help. E-mail to data base, "what do you have on Cranston Snord, foo@bar.com?" It turns out he was booted off of Y and Z's list. Now X knows Y and knows she would not do any such thing capriciously, but at least he knows now that there is a problem, which is 90% of the way to solving it. What to do is up to X, as always. I would also want such a data base to cross-reference aliases. That way you could find out that Cranston is also known as Farley Flamer, or that bar.com seems to have an awful lot of problem email coming from it lately. All of this is really no more than the Better Business Bureau does. X, Y, and Z, when they have a problem, copy the offending posting and send it in for future reference. Suppose Z has to finally call the authorites to have a chat with the much-wronged Mr. Snord. They will pay a lot more attention to Z if he has a history. True? Well, it's not a perfect scheme, and now that I have written some of it down it seems like a lot more work than I at first thought. But worth it if the resulting data base becomes really useful. Anyway, if as many as four list managers want to participate I would be willing to start the data base, although I think I would want to pass it to someone else later this year. Please note: I will be out of the office starting now through the end of the week to attend UniForum (come see our Fast Ethernet PCI Adpater) in Dallas. I will only be able to respond to e-mail after next weekend. Regards, and thanks for your comments, -------------------------------- Alan Deikman, ZNYX Corporation alan@znyx.com From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 11:50:25 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id LAA11001 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 11:22:28 -0800 Received: from shell1.best.com (shell1.best.com [204.156.128.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id LAA10995 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 11:22:25 -0800 Received: from [204.156.141.133] (agoodloe.vip.best.com [204.156.141.133]) by shell1.best.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) with SMTP id LAA04726; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 11:19:36 -0800 Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 11:19:36 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Kjetil Torgrim Homme From: agoodloe@best.com (Amy Goodloe) Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Kjetil Torgrim Homme writes: >One reason to keep the list open to non-subscribers is gateways. The >sysadmins here urge people to use the Usenet mirrors rather than >subscribing ourselves (they are pretty responsive about creating new >ones as they are needed). The mirrors are one-way, so I'd have to send >mail to say linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu rather than post to >fa.linux.kernel. All this talk about gateways makes me wonder if my lists aren't maybe being gatewayed, WITHOUT my knowledge or permission. The object of all my lists is NOT size, but creating a comfortable environment for certain groups of people to engage in certain kinds of conversations. I don't want them gatewayed for all the world to read -- is there a way to avoid this? or to spot a "gatewayed" address? I've changed my majordomo settings to restricted-post by list members only (I had thought my sysadmin had done that already, but he apparently didn't set ANYTHING as I'd requested and left if all in default mode) -- so we'll see if this guy comes back to the one list. --amy agoodloe@best.com From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 12:50:20 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id MAA11922 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 12:25:08 -0800 Received: from wilma.cs.utk.edu (WILMA.CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.141]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id MAA11917 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 12:25:05 -0800 Received: from LOCALHOST by wilma.cs.utk.edu with SMTP (cf v2.11c-UTK) id PAA26973; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 15:18:36 -0500 Message-Id: <199503122018.PAA26973@wilma.cs.utk.edu> X-URI: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~moore/ From: Keith Moore To: alan@znyx.com (Alan Deikman) cc: Chris G Demetriou , list-managers@greatcircle.com, moore@cs.utk.edu Subject: Re: Abuse problem is not treatable by Software In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 12 Mar 1995 10:36:06 PST." <9503121836.AA08156@znyx.com> Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 15:18:28 -0500 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > >In general, i'm > >not of the opinion that the words "fuck" and "asshole" are appropriate > >for technical, computer-oriented lists, and i have no qualms about > >bouncing messages containing them. 8-) > > > >the chunk of perl to do it looks like: > > The problem, Chris, with these types of solutions is that they invite > further attack and do nothing, really, to solve the problem. Actually, I've found it quite effective to filter messages. But instead of rejecting such postings, I filter the copies of the messages that go to the people who complain about such things. So instead of seeing "fucking" they see "fardling", and everybody else sees what the sender intended. Our standard filter to do this job is called "tipper". It's just a sed script. Personal attacks are another thing entirely, but I wouldn't put up with these on my lists, regardless of whether four-letter words were used or not. Keith From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 12:52:20 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id MAA11980 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 12:30:22 -0800 Received: from shell1.best.com (shell1.best.com [204.156.128.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id MAA11975 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 12:30:19 -0800 Received: (frugal@localhost) by shell1.best.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) id MAA20938; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 12:27:40 -0800 Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 12:27:40 -0800 (PST) From: Linda Henneman To: Alan Deikman cc: Sharon Shea , list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Subject: Re: Proposed Trouble Data Base In-Reply-To: <9503121916.AA08237@znyx.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk Alan, I don't feel comfortable keeping a list, either. I worry about people on it finding out and perhaps trying to bring some legal action for libel against the person who keeps the database plus people who give input. Even if their claims have no merit, you still have to pay to get an attorney and defend yourself. I'm reminded of when I did volunteer work for a tenants' rights organization and we discussed keeping a list of landlords that people had had bad experiences w/so people could call and check it out before renting w/someone and it couldn't be set up for the above reason. Plus, mean-spirited people could give false information so people who don't deserve to have negative things said about them could end up having that happen. This may be comparing applies and oranges somewhat as there's not a business reputation at stake generally in the case of the "sicko" list abusers, but IMHO it still applies. I'd like to say a great big *thank you* to everyone who's responded to my original post about profanity on lists--had no idea it would generate such feedback! It's been very, very helpful and made me feel very comfortable to be firm in my resolve not to allow what I feel is inappropriate material on my list. Best wishes to my comrades in the world of list managing! Linda Henneman (frugal@best.com) On Sun, 12 Mar 1995, Alan Deikman wrote: > >> Amy, Sharon, Linda, would you participate? From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 14:20:30 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id NAA12710 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 13:56:06 -0800 Received: from cs.umb.edu (cs.umb.edu [158.121.104.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id NAA12705 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 13:56:03 -0800 Received: from terminus.cs.umb.edu by cs.umb.edu with SMTP id AA00292 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for ); Sun, 12 Mar 1995 16:53:45 -0500 Message-Id: <199503122153.AA00292@cs.umb.edu> To: "Dave Lampson" Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: Re: Help with Moderated List In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 02 Mar 1995 10:20:14 PST." <199503021824.KAA07815@miles.greatcircle.com> Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 16:53:27 -0500 From: "John P. Rouillard" Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk In message <199503021824.KAA07815@miles.greatcircle.com>, "Dave Lampson" writes: >I have set up a moderated mailing list, defined a distribution list, >created an info file, editted the config file, and most things seem to be >working fine, except that I can't get anything distributed. Subscribing >and retrieving info works, but when I try and approve a post for >distribution, it just keeps bouncing back to me. > >I have tried putting the "Approved:" line in both the header of the >message (I use elm) and as the first line in the body of a message, and >I've sent it to "list" and not to "list-request", but they just keep >getting bounced back for approval. I'm stumped, but surely I'm missing >something obvious. I've been through the documentation thoroughly, and >can't see any problem with the procedure I'm using. Any suggestions? When troubleshooting this type of problem do two things: add an archive program to the list alias so you can see the message that is given to resend use approve to generate a message compare your approved message against approve's approved message and see what needs to be done. This assumes that approve puts our a correct message. -- John From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 14:50:23 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id OAA13067 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 14:27:29 -0800 Received: from rex.cs.tulane.edu (rex.cs.tulane.edu [129.81.132.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id OAA13050 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 14:27:22 -0800 Received: by rex.cs.tulane.edu; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 16:25:05 -0600 >Received: by mintir.new-orleans.la.us (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Sun, 12 Mar 95 15:44:36 CST for list-managers@greatcircle.com To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: opening lists to non-subscribers... From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 12 Mar 95 15:40:08 CST In-Reply-To: Organization: Minas Tirith BBS (Public Access Usenet for New Orleans) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1655 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk rex!best.com!agoodloe (Amy Goodloe) writes: > At 10:21 PM 3/11/95, Kimberly Long wrote: > > >I cannot understand why anyone would not want to keep their list open > >to non-subscriber postings. Is there something I am missing? > > I can't understand why anyone WOULD want their lists open to non-subscriber > postings (is that what you meant?) I can't believe its the default in the > current version of majordomo to have lists open to random posts -- that > seems rather, well, dumb. But I also can't understand why it isn't harder > for outsiders to figure out the outgoing mail alias (I mean > listname-outgoing IS fairly obvious...) > This will vary from list to list. I keep my New Orleans list open to non-subscribers so folks can ask for info about the city without joining. I suppose some folks regard asking questions of a list membership without joining as being a bit rude, in the same way some people find messages that say things like "please e-mail me, I don't read this group regularly" rude on USENET. The default on my mail software was also to allow anyone to post, so majordomo is not unique in this regard. Now, I can see any list dealing with women's issues, gay or straight, as being a target for jerks. I'm sure that the authors of most list software didn't consider this when developing the programs. Nor did they factor in the increased number of "e-mail spams" we've been seeing lately. Cheers, Ed. |Edward J. Branley elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us| |Seashell Software +1.504.455.5087 (voice)| |3508 North Woodlawn Ave, Metairie, LA 70006 +1.504.455.8665 (bbs)| From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 15:20:22 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id PAA13566 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 15:11:44 -0800 Received: from usis.com (usis.com [199.171.178.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id PAA13561 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 15:11:41 -0800 Received: from siberia.usis.com (siberia.usis.com [199.171.178.71]) by usis.com (8.6.5/8.6.5) with SMTP id RAA10085 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 17:05:33 -0600 Message-Id: <199503122305.RAA10085@usis.com> From: "Kimberly Long" Organization: usis To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 17:05:56 +0000 Subject: Re: opening lists to non-subscribers... Reply-to: siberia@usis.com Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail/Windows (v1.22) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley) wrote in part: > >[...] > > This will vary from list to list. I keep my New Orleans list open to > non-subscribers so folks can ask for info about the city without joining. > I suppose some folks regard asking questions of a list membership without > joining as being a bit rude, in the same way some people find messages that say > things like "please e-mail me, I don't read this group regularly" rude on > USENET. The default on my mail software was also to allow anyone to post, so > majordomo is not unique in this regard. > [...] I hope I am not being perceived as argumentative by furthering this discussion. I am simply am trying to understand all thoughts on this issue. :-) In regards to your example, wouldn't your regular subscribers get tired of seeing repeated requests: "send me info about New Orleans" from people that are not subscribers to the list? I would suspect that you have developed a (I always want to put "an" in front of FAQ, it just sounds better) FAQ for your list. Wouldn't your subscribers be better served by a deflection of repeated requests? You could even set up an infobot to automatically reply to what would appear to be a rather common question thereby improving your S/N ratio on your list. Just thinking outloud.... :-) Namaste' Kimberly Long siberia@usis.com If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music he hears, however measured or far away. )O( ~~Thoreau From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 15:22:43 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id PAA13586 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 15:14:25 -0800 Received: from shell1.best.com (shell1.best.com [204.156.128.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id PAA13581 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 15:14:22 -0800 Received: from [204.156.141.133] (agoodloe.vip.best.com [204.156.141.133]) by shell1.best.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) with SMTP id PAA03091; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 15:11:29 -0800 Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 15:11:29 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "John P. Rouillard" , "Dave Lampson" From: agoodloe@best.com (Amy Goodloe) Subject: Re: Help with Moderated List Cc: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >In message <199503021824.KAA07815@miles.greatcircle.com>, >"Dave Lampson" writes: >>I have set up a moderated mailing list, defined a distribution list, >>created an info file, editted the config file, and most things seem to be >>working fine, except that I can't get anything distributed. Subscribing >>and retrieving info works, but when I try and approve a post for >>distribution, it just keeps bouncing back to me. >> >>I have tried putting the "Approved:" line in both the header of the >>message (I use elm) and as the first line in the body of a message, and >>I've sent it to "list" and not to "list-request", but they just keep >>getting bounced back for approval. I'm stumped, but surely I'm missing >>something obvious. I've been through the documentation thoroughly, and >>can't see any problem with the procedure I'm using. Any suggestions? What does the BOUNCED line say? Does it say: ADMIN REQUEST? It could be that you have your list set up to filter out administrative requests, which means that majordomo will bounce any message with the words subscribe, unsubscribe, help, info, lists or several others in the first five lines. While I find this sometimes useful as a feature, it's often a PITA, esp. if you're running a help list where people routinely use those words in their posts. Or does the bounced line say: INVALID APPROVAL or something like that? I approve messages by adding the following THREE lines at the beginning of the message to be approved: ----------------------------- Approved: passwd From: fill in sender Subject: fill in subject Paste message here. Address message to listname@site.com. ------------------------------ For what it's worth, I find the approval process often quite tricky, and have even seen some of my messages go right to the list WITH the approval lines (and passwords) still in them... Sorry not to be of much more help. --amy From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 15:50:21 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id PAA13959 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 15:35:17 -0800 Received: from MIT.EDU (SOUTH-STATION-ANNEX.MIT.EDU [18.72.1.2]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id PAA13954 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 15:35:14 -0800 From: pshuang@MIT.EDU Received: from CARTOON.MIT.EDU by MIT.EDU with SMTP id AB10176; Sun, 12 Mar 95 18:32:54 EST Received: by cartoon.MIT.EDU (5.57/4.7) id AA16579; Sun, 12 Mar 95 18:32:54 -0500 Date: Sun, 12 Mar 95 18:32:54 -0500 Message-Id: <9503122332.AA16579@cartoon.MIT.EDU> To: List-Managers@GreatCircle.COM In-Reply-To: list-managers-digest-owner@GreatCircle.COM's message of Sun, 12 Mar 1995 01:00:12 -0800 <199503120900.BAA03400@miles.greatcircle.com> Subject: Unwelcome subscribers (was: List Moderation and Profanity) Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > From: agoodloe@best.com (Amy Goodloe) > Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 09:54:39 -0800 > > [....] > > I have a similar concern. There is someone who is subscribed to one > of my lists who is clearl NOT welcome on the list; the list policies > state as much and he has been told privately twice. [....] I used to run a mailing list for people who wished to conduct discussions about Greek Letter organizations (both social and non-social fraternities and sororities) with less flamage than could be found on various Usenet newsgroups (e.g., soc.college), a topic which can also "draw maggots out of the woodwork". (I'm sure another such maggot-drawing topic would be religion.) At one point, someone who was fair well-known in those Usenet newsgroups for taking one side of long flaming effectively content-free threads wanted to subscribe to the mailing list. After some discussion amongst ourselves, the other list owner and I decided to let him subscribe, after explicitly letting him know he needs to be on "good behavior". Although he WAS on pretty good behavior ON THE MAILING LIST, many other subscribers immediately engaged in ad hominem attacks, flooded the mailing list itself with protests despite requests from myself and the other list owner to send such protests to us, and in general made mayhem. One of the reasons the other list owner and I decided to discontinue the list was precisely our disgust at this kind of reaction. There wasn't much question that we could have denied him a subscription; however, we felt that he was being more reasonable than many others on the mailing list and therefore did not deserve to get kicked off. Quoted below is the policy about such problem subscribers from a different mailing list I help maintain, which sets an explicit policy for removal and appeal. Other list maintainers/owners may wish to adapt such a policy for their own mailing lists; alternatively, you may decide that you would rather not set such a policy in stone. > ******** Policy concerning removal from the lists > > The administrators reserve the right to remove individuals from the > lists under extraordinary circumstances. It is difficult to > anticipate every reason why someone might be removed from the > lists; in general, behavior which is substantially disruptive to > the list and which is known by the perpetrator to be inappropriate > may lead to removal. > > An individual who is removed from the lists will be notified of the > removal by the administrators. If he or she wishes to appeal the > removal, a poll will be taken of the current membership of the > faq-maintainers list. If 10% or more of the current membership > supports reinstatement, the individual will be returned to the lists. -- Yours in Leadership, Friendship, and Service, Ping Huang (INTERNET: pshuang@mit.edu), probably speaking for himself From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 18:20:28 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id RAA15770 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 17:58:57 -0800 Received: from rex.cs.tulane.edu (rex.cs.tulane.edu [129.81.132.1]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id RAA15765 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 17:58:54 -0800 Received: by rex.cs.tulane.edu; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 19:56:37 -0600 >Received: by mintir.new-orleans.la.us (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Sun, 12 Mar 95 19:32:22 CST for list-managers@greatcircle.com To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Subject: messages from non-subscribers From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 12 Mar 95 19:21:28 CST In-Reply-To: <199503122305.RAA10085@usis.com> Organization: Minas Tirith BBS (Public Access Usenet for New Orleans) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2390 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk "Kimberly Long" writes: > I hope I am not being perceived as argumentative by furthering this > discussion. I am simply am trying to understand all thoughts on this > issue. :-) > > In regards to your example, wouldn't your regular subscribers get > tired of seeing repeated requests: "send me info about New Orleans" > from people that are not subscribers to the list? I would suspect > that you have developed a (I always want to put "an" in front of FAQ, > it just sounds better) FAQ for your list. Wouldn't your subscribers > be better served by a deflection of repeated requests? You could > even set up an infobot to automatically reply to what would appear to > be a rather common question thereby improving your S/N ratio on your > list. I do indeed have a FAQ for the list, so I use the reply to the non-subscriber to let them know where that is. That in itself is a service to many on the list, since so many newbies don't read the "welcome" message that they receive when they subscribe. They are either unaware of how to get the FAQ or they've forgotten. Most of the requests tend to be more specific than "send me info about New Orleans," so I try to turn a negative (repeated questions) into a positive (fodder for discussion among regulars). For example, Jane Non-subscriber sends a message that reads something like: "I'm coming to town on such-and-such a date. What are some good places to eat?" I'll post some suggestions, and, if I'm feeling particularly devilish, I'll make one or two of those suggestions someplace that will spark controversy amongst the regulars. A discussion on the relative merits of the restaurants ensues. Jane gets her answer, and the regulars chat. Everyone's happy. I suppose if the off-list requests became more frequent than they are now, I might consider a policy change. Fortunately, the incidence of spamming on my list has been light, and the off-list requests have been fairly intelligent questions (e.g., restaurant recommendations, requests from folks doing research on specifics, etc.) > > Just thinking outloud.... :-) > So long as nobody hears you... :-) Cheers, Ed. |Edward J. Branley elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us| |Seashell Software +1.504.455.5087 (voice)| |3508 North Woodlawn Ave, Metairie, LA 70006 +1.504.455.8665 (bbs)| From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 19:51:44 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id TAA17456 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 19:30:04 -0800 Received: from shell1.best.com (shell1.best.com [204.156.128.10]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id XAA02820 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 23:52:35 -0800 Received: from [204.156.141.133] (agoodloe.vip.best.com [204.156.141.133]) by shell1.best.com (8.6.10/8.6.5) with SMTP id XAA12461; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 23:49:55 -0801 Date: Sat, 11 Mar 1995 23:49:55 -0801 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: alan@znyx.com (Alan Deikman) From: agoodloe@best.com (Amy Goodloe) Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity Cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >I wonder if anyone besides myself would see a value in keeping and >accessing a private list of such individuals. I would be willing to >maintain and disperse this data-base for known list managers. I would >take contributions that would help track these guys and help keep them >from becoming a problem. The point would not be to "blacklist" anyone >but to keep an impartial record for use by list managers, particularly >if they might have to get the authorities involved. Amy, Sharon, Linda, >would you participate? I'm not so sure it would be useful to me, b/c the people likely to be giving me trouble wouldn't be the same kind giving others trouble -- the reasons and just about everything else would be different. But I WOULD appreciate it if someone would develop a better way of keeping unwanted people OFF my lists, without me having to resort to making them moderated (I run 7 lists; they ALREADY take up too much time -- moderation would be HELL). I suppose I should just be more choosy in my approval of subscribe requests process... --amy From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 19:54:57 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id TAA17458 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 19:30:08 -0800 Received: from LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU (LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.198.241]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id BAA04138 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 01:26:15 -0800 Message-Id: <199503120926.BAA04138@miles.greatcircle.com> Received: from localhost by LAGAVULIN.PDL.CS.CMU.EDU id aa09321; 12 Mar 95 4:23 EST To: Amy Goodloe cc: list-managers@greatcircle.com X-Copyright: Copyright 1995, Christopher G. Demetriou. All rights reserved. X-Notice: Duplication and redistribution prohibited without consent of the author. Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 11 Mar 1995 09:54:39 PST." Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 04:23:11 -0500 From: Chris G Demetriou Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk > I have a similar concern. There is someone who is subscribed to one of my > lists who is clearl NOT welcome on the list; the list policies state as > much and he has been told privately twice. The problem is that I can't > seem to unsubscribe him, as his address does not appear to be listed in the > majordomo listmember file. I've tried searching for as many variations as > possible, but I can't seem to figure out HOW he's getting list mail -- b/c > it must be under a name that IS on the list; otherwise he wouldn't be > "allowed" by majordomo to post to it. Well, assuming that the restriction that he must be on the list to post to it is actually in effect have you tried logging all incoming mail for the list (i.e. dumping it into a log file via a sendmail alias), and comparing all of the addresses in that (e.g. From, Sender, etc.) against those in the 'bad posts' and the subscription list? If you only look at the mail after majordomo has resent it, some of the "jucier" headers may have been clobbered. chris From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 19:58:43 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id TAA17436 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 19:29:59 -0800 Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com (uumail2.netcom.com [163.179.3.52]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with ESMTP id LAA21116 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 11:21:51 -0800 Received: from znyx.com by netcomsv.netcom.com with SMTP (8.6.9/SMI-4.1) id LAA13369; Sat, 11 Mar 1995 11:18:47 -0800 Received: from alan.znyx.com by znyx.com (5.65/1.35) id AA03094; Sat, 11 Mar 95 11:24:14 -0800 Date: Sat, 11 Mar 95 11:24:14 -0800 Message-Id: <9503111924.AA03094@znyx.com> X-Sender: alan@znyx.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: list-managers@GreatCircle.COM From: alan@znyx.com (Alan Deikman) Subject: Re: List Moderation and Profanity Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk >I have a similar concern. There is someone who is subscribed to one of my >lists who is clearl NOT welcome on the list; the list policies state as >much and he has been told privately twice. The problem is that I can't >seem to unsubscribe him, as his address does not appear to be listed in the >majordomo listmember file. I've tried searching for as many variations as >possible, but I can't seem to figure out HOW he's getting list mail -- b/c >it must be under a name that IS on the list; otherwise he wouldn't be >"allowed" by majordomo to post to it. >I've gotten notes from a few subscribers telling me about what this guy has >done on other lists, and I'm quite sure he knows he isn't welcome on this >list and has deliberately made it tough to track down his subscribed >address. Any ideas on how I CAN track it down, or on what to do? The list >is currently not moderated, but I suppose if all else fails I *could* just >make it moderated... > Yow. What a nightmare. I can think of several techniques for gate crashers. The most trivial, and the one you are probably looking for, is to get an alias in one domain or another. There are a lot of systems on the Internet where you can get an account fairly easily, often for free. Also likely is a collaborator on your list that happens to be in good standing is sending him copies of postings. The worst case is if he has su access to a system that handles a lot of Internet mail, including acting as a gateway for *your* system. There are all sorts of games a hacker can play with "catching" mail, corrupting it, and re-sending it, making it impossible to trace. If he is doing this, you may have a case to take to the police. This kind of hacking is against the law and its possible the owner of the system he is using is not even aware of it. Good luck, -------------------------------- Alan Deikman, ZNYX Corporation alan@znyx.com From list-managers-owner Sun Mar 12 22:50:37 1995 Received: (daemon@localhost) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) id WAA22542 for list-managers-outgoing; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 22:33:43 -0800 Received: from UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU (UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU [129.7.1.11]) by miles.greatcircle.com (8.6.9/Miles-941015-1) with SMTP id WAA22537 for ; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 22:33:37 -0800 Received: from Taronga.COM by UUCP-GW.CC.UH.EDU with UUCP id AA10955 (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for greatcircle.com!list-managers); Mon, 13 Mar 1995 00:04:07 -0600 Received: by bonkers.taronga.com (smail2.5p) id AA27370; 12 Mar 95 23:43:42 CST (Sun) Received: (from arielle@localhost) by bonkers.taronga.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) id XAA27367 for list-managers@greatcircle.com; Sun, 12 Mar 1995 23:43:41 -0600 From: Stephanie da Silva Message-Id: <199503130543.XAA27367@bonkers.taronga.com> Subject: Re: Failed LISTSERV@wsyd.com access? what happened from your end(fwd) To: list-managers@greatcircle.com Date: Sun, 12 Mar 1995 23:43:40 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1192 Sender: list-managers-owner@GreatCircle.COM Precedence: bulk I was a third party to this, it got cc'ed to me (I probably did send his listserv a request that bounced). But I thought it might be of interest to some list owners, to see if their lists were involved in this abuse. > From: Barry Kort > Message-Id: <199503121654.LAA24894@michael.