Re: [Mailman-Users] Sender address as footer field?

On August 15, 2018 9:34:14 AM PDT, Jayson Smith wrote: > If personalization is enabled I can give the Email address receiving the >message, but not the sender. Are there any plans to include this as a >substitution, or is there a simple patch which could be applied to >source? There are no pl

[Mailman-Users] Sender address as footer field?

Hi, I run a mailing list where posters are supposed to put their Email address somewhere in their message to make private replies easier, but some don't, even after being reminded privately. A year or two ago I investigated putting the sender's Email address in the footer, but when I checked

Re: [Mailman-Users] Sender address domain expanded - posts rejected byprivacy options

Drew Tenenholz wrote: > >One newly added user is having trouble posting. I believe Mailman >may be doing something I didn't expect, and we've been able to >compensate for it, but I'd like to know if I'm going crazy or not. >I've set up the poster with a series of email account settings as >fol

[Mailman-Users] Sender address domain expanded - posts rejected by privacy options

Dear fountain of Mailman knowledge -- Something strange is happening on a Mailman 2.1.9 installation that is being run for me. I wonder if it makes sense to any of you out there. We are running a closed list, which severely restricts who is allowed to post and subscribe. This is mostly for

Re: [Mailman-Users] Sender address..

John W. Baxter wrote: > >OK, thanks. I was volunteering, but didn't want to forge ahead without >letting the idea be visible for a while. I'll wait a while longer for a >possible "veto". I agree with Brad and welcome your help. I try to be diligent about using example.com as the domain in stuf

Re: [Mailman-Users] Sender address..

On 8/24/06 11:11 AM, "Brad Knowles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 10:41 AM -0700 2006-08-24, John W. Baxter wrote: > >> Is there any interest in sanitizing the FAQ by adjusting examples to follow >> RFC 2606 as closely as possible? I'm reasonably sure that 2.003 isn't the >> only entry whic

Re: [Mailman-Users] Sender address..

At 10:41 AM -0700 2006-08-24, John W. Baxter wrote: > Is there any interest in sanitizing the FAQ by adjusting examples to follow > RFC 2606 as closely as possible? I'm reasonably sure that 2.003 isn't the > only entry which could use adjustment. Sure, that's a great idea. The Mailman FAQ Wi

Re: [Mailman-Users] Sender address..

On 8/24/06 6:48 AM, "Mark Sapiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > See > . Unfortunately, both domains used in the examples at the top of that FAQ entry exist (although the FQDNs of the hosts mailman and poster within those domains

Re: [Mailman-Users] Sender address..

Stefan Sundberg wrote: > >I have a question however regarding the sender address in the emails >which is sent to the list members. Currently the address looks like this: > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] for [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >I only want to show the original sender address: > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Is it pos

[Mailman-Users] Sender address..

Hi! I am using Mailman on the FreeBSD + Mailscanner and Sendmail and it works great. I have a question however regarding the sender address in the emails which is sent to the list members. Currently the address looks like this: [EMAIL PROTECTED] for [EMAIL PROTECTED] I only want to show the or

Re: [Mailman-Users] Sender address modified

At 10:56 PM +0100 2005-01-12, Henrik Grimm wrote: On our mailing lists some members get mails with the sender listed as "-bounces@" instead of the actual sender. This is a problem since if they reply to the mail it does not get to the one who sent it. What is the reason for this and how can it

[Mailman-Users] Sender address modified

On our mailing lists some members get mails with the sender listed as "-bounces@" instead of the actual sender. This is a problem since if they reply to the mail it does not get to the one who sent it. What is the reason for this and how can it be avoided? /Henrik --