Great Circle Associates Majordomo-Users
(January 1996)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: Desireable changes to maillist programs
From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" <rogerk @ queernet . org>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 09:43:04 -0800
To: loren @ hops . wharton . upenn . edu
Cc: majordomo-users @ greatcircle . com, majordomo-workers @ greatcircle . com

At 12:12 PM 1/15/96 -0500, you wrote:
>> At 10:58 AM 1/15/96 -0500, you wrote:
>> >Chan writes:
>> >> Uh, Majordomo already does this.  Turn "administravia" on for the
>> >> desired list, and it will catch those messages before they go out to
>> >> the list.
>> >
>> >This is sort of true. If the word "help" is anywhere in the first four
>> >lines of the message, or any other "administrative" word, then the
>> >message gets bounced to the list owner.  It does not automatically
>> >process subscribe and unsubscribe requests sent to the list, as Wade
>> >suggested.  I agree with Wade that this would be a good thing.
>> 
>> So if someone sends a message that says "I'm so mad at Newsweek I'm
>> going to unsubscribe" you want them removed from the list, without your
>> even seeing the original erroneous request?
>
>Nope.
>
>What I want is that if someone sends a message to the list that says
>"please unsubscribe me" or "unsubscribe" and that's all in the first
>line then they get unsubbed.  And, I don't like the current behavior
>of searching through the first four lines of the message for
>administrivia.  It catches about 90% false positives.  The rest of
>your ranting is in reaction to the straw man you set up, so I'll
>ignore it.

I'd say that about 10% of the misaddressed requests I get say "unsubscribe"
or "unsubscribe <listname>" or "please unsubscribe me"... the vast majority
say "i need to unsubscribe from this list" or "I am changing service providers
so unsubscribe me" or the ever-popular "just unsubscribe <listname> on a line
by itself".  Your tests would never catch those.

Your argument seems to me not unlike:

        "Many people mistake = for == in C programming, so why not
        make them equivalent?"

People need to learn to use the protocols and standards that exist.

As for the "90% false positives" bit: that is known as giving the CORRECT
user the benefit of the doubt.  It seems to me like you are setting up
tools to make life easier for the improperly-behaving user.  Education,
not sloppiness, is the answer.

You can, of course, always do what we do here with misdirected admin
requests: ignore them.

What would you do with

        unsubscribe joe@othernode.com

        His postings are making me nuts!

?
---
ROGER B.A. KLORESE                                          rogerk@QueerNet.ORG
2215-R Market Street #576         San Francisco, CA 94114       +1 415 ALL-ARFF
"There is only one real blasphemy -- the refusal of joy!"       -- Paul Rudnick


Indexed By Date Previous: Freelance help installing majordomo
From: mark@metrobeat01.metrobeat.com (Mark Davies)
Next: Apologies
From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" <rogerk@queernet.org>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Desireable changes to maillist programs
From: "Roger B.A. Klorese" <rogerk@queernet.org>
Next: Re: Desireable changes to maillist programs
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@caip.rutgers.edu>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com