Greetings.
First, I suppose an intro is in order. I've been browsing the
list-manager list archives and enjoy reading the discussions. I can
relate very well to clueless newby stories, unsubscribe requests sent
to the list (although instructions on doing this and other list
functions is now a part of my sig file, fer cryin out loud), problems
with MS Outlook attachments, and bounced mail from Juno. So I joined
this list :-)
I've been running a general discussion list since 1993. To circumvent
problems with spam and trollers, the list became subscriber-only in
1994. Because the list is of a religious nature and because of the
diverse yet strongly held views held by the listmembers, I had to take
it moderated later that same year. And because people can't figure out
how to use filters, I limit posts to 35 each day. The list has been
running right around 220 subscribers for the past couple of years. I've
got scripts to automate a bunch of this stuff.
--
Now my question for the day: I have one recent subscriber who is
submitting messages with non-RFC compliant broken headers.
Specifically, he's using some beta copy of a mailer for Prodigy.
Listproc handles that just fine, and I haven't heard of anybody's MUA
breaking when they get his mail, but it makes our archiver core-dump.
I've asked the guy who maintains our archive about the possibility of
patching the archiver software, but of course he has a million-and-one
other things to do.
So in the meantime, we're zotting all submissions from this guy. We
(the other listowners and I) explained the problem to him, advised him
to contact Prodigy tech support and told him *exactly* what to tell
Prodigy. We suggested that he could use Prodigy to read his mail and
some free service (hotmail or Juno or something) to send messages to
the list.
The guy never writes back to us, but continues sending responses to
messages on the list. It's like he's not getting are mail, nor
noticing that his mail isn't getting distributed. We let him now each
time his message gets deleted. It's geting old.
Any ideas or comments?
Thanks,
Richard Masoner
Follow-Ups:
|
|
