On Sat, 18 Jan 2003 15:43:06 -0500
Barry A Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I got working a prototype integration of Mailman and spambayes, and
> I'll probably be checking this into cvs when I get back . I'd
> label it as an interesting experiment, but whether it'll be useful
> remains to be s
> "JAE" == Jeff A Earickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JAE> In my study of my mailing lists today (both new in MM 2.1,
JAE> and upgraded from 2.0.13), I made the sad discovery that
JAE> generic_nonmember_action = 0
JAE> for **all** of my lists. The "bend over and take spam
On Wednesday, January 15, 2003, at 02:12 PM, Jeff A. Earickson wrote:
Why should the list administrator be bothered with having to
tend admin requests from spammers and other idiots?
Because enough things have changed between 2.0 and 2.1 without changing
the default for handling non-member po
> Why should the list administrator be bothered with having to
> tend admin requests from spammers and other idiots?
Jeff,
I assume this is because people are generally more concerned about false
positives in spam-checking than they are with having to glance at a few
admin requests. I suppose mo
Y'all,
In my study of my mailing lists today (both new in MM 2.1,
and upgraded from 2.0.13), I made the sad discovery that
generic_nonmember_action = 0
for **all** of my lists. The "bend over and take spam"
setting. I noticed that DEFAULT_GENERIC_NONMEMBER_ACTION is
set to one in Mailman/De
