Great Circle Associates Majordomo-Workers
(January 1997)

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

Subject: Re: Hello :)
From: Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs @ hpc . uh . edu>
Date: 09 Jan 1997 22:23:15 -0600
To: majordomo-workers @ greatcircle . com
In-reply-to:'s message of Thu, 9 Jan 97 22:17:26 EST
References: <>

>>>>> "EAS" == Eric A Seiden <> writes:

EAS> 1. WHO is a great command but I have it set to members only for
EAS> security reasons. The list owner needs access to this. How about WHO
EAS> PASSWORD sending it regardless of setting.

approve password who list

should work fine.

EAS> 2. There is an option that allows ONLY list members to post. There
EAS> should be an override for that too.

Embedded approve header, perhaps?  Read list-owner-info, which tells you
how to do this.  You of course need the list password.

>>> Is there a wildcard like unsubscribe USERNAME@* ?

My in-development 2.0 code has this.

EAS> 4. The impossible but cool suggestion. The famous "550" unknown user
EAS> error.  If majordomo just killed these automatically and sent the
EAS> owner a note "Due to a 550 error, was removed from
EAS> the list" There's no other message it's safe to do this on because
EAS> most are temporary outages, but a 550 means the user just is gone.

You must not have list members at netcom.  You'll get random "user unknown"
messages from them, even though they still exist.

In any case, this is perfectly doable by an external bounce processor and
doesn't need to be built into Majordomo.  If only someone would write one.

EAS> If the post is lengthy (pick a random K size like 4) the filter should
EAS> self-disable.

You can adjust the filters of you want, and they only look in the first ten
lines anyway.  Length of message is not a good indication of content,
either.  I will think about putting a size qualifier into the access
controls, though.

EAS> 6. Spam Wall suggestion on 'who' commands. Majordomo should
EAS> (optionally?)  report who usage.

It's right there in the logs.  Notification will be possible under the
future general access control mechanism.

So 2.5 "already in there"'s, 1.5 "in my development code"'s, 1 "find
somebody to write it", and 1 "don't agree that it's useful, but I'll see if
it can be added to the development code".  How's that?

 - J<

  • Re: Hello :)
    From: (Eric A. Seiden)
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Digest problems
From: Jason L Tibbitts III <>
Next: Re: Hello :)
From: jonathon <>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Hello :)
From: (Eric A. Seiden)
Next: Re: Hello :)
From: jonathon <>

Search Internet Search