Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy Options > Sender Filters > Accept_these_non-members

On 08/23/2017 11:00 AM, Paul Hunt wrote: > Version 2.1.24 > > According to the documentation, I can set Privacy Options > Sender Filters > > Accept_these_non-members to allow members of other local lists to post. It is > not working for me. > > Example: > Domain: parishplayers.org > List: bo...

[Mailman-Users] Privacy Options > Sender Filters > Accept_these_non-members

Version 2.1.24 According to the documentation, I can set Privacy Options > Sender Filters > Accept_these_non-members to allow members of other local lists to post. It is not working for me. Example: Domain: parishplayers.org List: bo...@parishplayers.org I added: @digital to Accept_these_non-me

Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy Options Filtering

On 06/30/2013 12:51 PM, Cyndi Norwitz wrote: > > On Jun 3, 2013, at 5:00 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: > >> On 06/03/2013 03:21 PM, Cyndi Norwitz wrote: >>> 2) To add a domain name to the list, you have to use a regular expression >>> in this form: >>> ^[^@]+@(.*\.)?domain\.com$ (or use net, info, et

Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy Options Filtering

On Jun 3, 2013, at 5:00 PM, Mark Sapiro wrote: > On 06/03/2013 03:21 PM, Cyndi Norwitz wrote: >> This must have come at a bad time because no one seemed to have seen it. > > > I saw it, left it in my inbox for later and never saw it again until > now. Sorry and thanks for reposting. Thanks for

Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy Options Filtering

Mark Sapiro writes: > The bug is only that if you select "Add to one of > these sender filters:" Mailman will add the address to one of the > *_these_nonmembers filters and later you will be unable to edit that > filter through the web UI unless and until you remove the invalid > address. A

Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy Options Filtering

On 06/04/2013 01:25 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > > > OK. This is a bug. I have entered it in the tracker at > > and I will fix it, but > > I'm not yet sure how. And the filter does continue to work for all > > addresses, even the bad ones.

Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy Options Filtering

Mark Sapiro writes: > On 06/03/2013 03:21 PM, Cyndi Norwitz wrote: > > Could there be an easier way? I don't want to run the risk of > > list owners overdoing this, but some spam usernames are super > > obvious. Like freecredit or onlinepoker. > > Learn simple regular expressions. There a

Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy Options Filtering

On 06/03/2013 03:21 PM, Cyndi Norwitz wrote: > This must have come at a bad time because no one seemed to have seen it. I saw it, left it in my inbox for later and never saw it again until now. Sorry and thanks for reposting. > First of all, as a wish list, I would love love love if you made so

[Mailman-Users] Privacy Options Filtering

This must have come at a bad time because no one seemed to have seen it. I'm reposting. Thanks, Cyndi Begin forwarded message: From: Cyndi Norwitz Subject: [Mailman-Users] Privacy Options Filtering Date: April 29, 2013 1:54:26 PM PDT To: Mailman-Users@python.org Hi Mark and everyone,

[Mailman-Users] Privacy Options Filtering

Hi Mark and everyone, I'm going to call this a bug, for lack of a better term. I use Mailman version 2.1.11. It's hosted at my ISP and I have zero control over upgrading. Sometimes they do some custom builds but I doubt that's an issue here. I've had the same set of issues with previous vers

Re: [Mailman-Users] privacy options, SPAM, regex

Helmut Schneider wrote: > >As far as I can see this patch works great. As a positive side effect, is it >possible that this patch also affects uncaught bounces? I recieve lots of >uncaught bounces now where a SPAM-filter was required before the patch. No. The patch has absolutely no effect on u

Re: [Mailman-Users] privacy options, SPAM, regex

From: "Mark Sapiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mark Sapiro wrote: Helmut Schneider wrote: Interesting, with "^subject:.*Declined.*" Subject: Declined: [Somelist] Invitation to workshop on 13rd Dec. 2008 matches while Subject: [Somelist] Declined: Invitation to workshop on 13rd Dec. 2008 does not.

Re: [Mailman-Users] privacy options, SPAM, regex

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Mark Sapiro wrote: > Helmut Schneider wrote: >> Interesting, with "^subject:.*Declined.*" >> >> Subject: Declined: [Somelist] Invitation to workshop on 13rd Dec. 2008 >> >> matches while >> >> Subject: [Somelist] Declined: Invitation to workshop on 13

Re: [Mailman-Users] privacy options, SPAM, regex

Helmut Schneider wrote: > >Interesting, with "^subject:.*Declined.*" > >Subject: Declined: [Somelist] Invitation to workshop on 13rd Dec. 2008 > >matches while > >Subject: [Somelist] Declined: Invitation to workshop on 13rd Dec. 2008 > >does not. Huh?! It turns out that RFC 2047 encoded headers

Re: [Mailman-Users] privacy options, SPAM, regex

Helmut Schneider wrote: I have lots of problems with out-of-office replies. I tried to set up a few filter rules using 2.1.10. Unfortuantely they don't catch them. Are the expressions case sensitiv? Are the expressions basic or extended? What I tried yet: ^subject:.*Accepted.* ^subject:.*De

Re: [Mailman-Users] privacy options, SPAM, regex

Michael Welch wrote: > >>^subject:.*is out of office.* > >I just added this rule as a "Reject" since we have had a few of these come to >the list lately. >^subject:.*out of office.* > >Would folks be willing to share the rules they have developed that would apply >to general business lists? We ha

Re: [Mailman-Users] privacy options, SPAM, regex

Hi friends. >^subject:.*is out of office.* I just added this rule as a "Reject" since we have had a few of these come to the list lately. ^subject:.*out of office.* Would folks be willing to share the rules they have developed that would apply to general business lists? We have not had any pro

Re: [Mailman-Users] privacy options, SPAM, regex

Helmut Schneider wrote: > Mark Sapiro wrote: >> Helmut Schneider wrote: >>> >>> I have lots of problems with out-of-office replies. I tried to set up >>> a few filter rules using 2.1.10. Unfortuantely they don't catch them. >>> Are the expressions case sensitiv? Are the expressions basic or >>

Re: [Mailman-Users] privacy options, SPAM, regex

- Original Message - From: "Mark Sapiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Helmut Schneider" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2008 5:12 AM Subject: Re: [Mailman-Users] privacy options, SPAM, regex Helmut Schneider wrote: I have lots of proble

Re: [Mailman-Users] privacy options, SPAM, regex

Helmut Schneider wrote: > >I have lots of problems with out-of-office replies. I tried to set up a few >filter rules using 2.1.10. Unfortuantely they don't catch them. Are the >expressions case sensitiv? Are the expressions basic or extended? > >What I tried yet: > >^subject:.*Accepted.* >^subjec

[Mailman-Users] privacy options, SPAM, regex

Hi, I have lots of problems with out-of-office replies. I tried to set up a few filter rules using 2.1.10. Unfortuantely they don't catch them. Are the expressions case sensitiv? Are the expressions basic or extended? What I tried yet: ^subject:.*Accepted.* ^subject:.*Declined.* ^subject:.*i

Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy Options > Sender Filters> non-memberfilters

Charles Marcus wrote: > > >> One way you could accomplish this is to get the patch at >> . > >Looks like this will work - thanks! But... I prefer to not apply custom >patches if at all possible - is support

Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy Options > Sender Filters > non-memberfilters

>> Is it possible to reference a one-address-per-line text file for this >> filter? > Not without modifying the source code. > > One way you could accomplish this is to get the patch at > . > Then you coul

Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy Options > Sender Filters > non-memberfilters

>> Is it possible to reference a one-address-per-line text file for this >> filter? > Not without modifying the source code. > > One way you could accomplish this is to get the patch at > . > Then you coul

Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy Options > Sender Filters > non-memberfilters

Charles Marcus wrote: > >Is it possible to reference a one-address-per-line text file for this >filter? Not without modifying the source code. One way you could accomplish this is to get the patch at . The

[Mailman-Users] Privacy Options > Sender Filters > non-member filters

I have googled to no avail, and find nothing in the docs... Is it possible to reference a one-address-per-line text file for this filter? I have 8 lists, and all need to reference the same list of addresses as a 'whitelist', so that only those non-members are allowed to post. As it is now, I h

Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy options

right... sorry... thanks... > In a flurry of recycled electrons, kalin mintchev wrote: > >> in the 2.0 version i had before in the Privacy options there was a >> setting for every single message to be approved - doesn't matter if the >> member was new or not. now i can't find this... i s

Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy options

On Tuesday 21 June 2005 03:59 pm, kalin mintchev wrote: > hi all... > > i just upgraded to 2.1.5... > > in the 2.0 version i had before in the Privacy options there was > a setting for every single message to be approved - doesn't matter if > the member was new or not. now i can't find this...

Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy options

In a flurry of recycled electrons, kalin mintchev wrote: > in the 2.0 version i had before in the Privacy options there was a > setting for every single message to be approved - doesn't matter if the > member was new or not. now i can't find this... i see that there is a way > to turn that b

[Mailman-Users] Privacy options

hi all... i just upgraded to 2.1.5... in the 2.0 version i had before in the Privacy options there was a setting for every single message to be approved - doesn't matter if the member was new or not. now i can't find this... i see that there is a way to turn that behavior for posts per me

Re: [Mailman-Users] Privacy Options

Abbas Qaizar wrote: > >If we look at one of the features in : -> Privacy Options > Subscription >Rules ---> What steps are required for subscription ??? And there are >3-options. > >if we go Confirm and Approve then ??? The potential subscriber gets a confirmation e-mail to conf

[Mailman-Users] Privacy Options

Hello Everybody, If we look at one of the features in : -> Privacy Options > Subscription Rules ---> What steps are required for subscription ??? And there are 3-options. if we go Confirm and Approve then ??? Kindly keep in mind that the addresses are stored by the moderator h

[Mailman-Users] Privacy options question

I've got some users who are non-moderated members of lists that are part of an umbrella list. They can post to their own list, but when they try to post to the umbrella list, their message goes in the holding bin waiting approval. Since these people aren't technically members of the umbrella l

Re: [Mailman-Users] privacy options...

At 15:03 27/02/2003, Margrit Lottmann wrote: I have a question in connection with sender filters for a closed list. We are using mailman 2.1.1 (german). I have to generate a list, which is closed. I have to allow that all members can send emails to the list and a number of other addresses: special

[Mailman-Users] privacy options...

I have a question in connection with sender filters for a closed list. We are using mailman 2.1.1 (german). I have to generate a list, which is closed. I have to allow that all members can send emails to the list and a number of other addresses: special known addresses which I can exactly specify

Re: [Mailman-Users] privacy options and a "personal" mailing list.

On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 01:10:32PM -0700, George Hartzell wrote: > So, I decided to set up my own mailman mailing list, forward the > messages there, subscribe myself to it, and let it digestify them for > me (hurray for mailman's mime digests!). Nice hack... Almost makes me sorry I don't do dig

[Mailman-Users] privacy options and a "personal" mailing list.

I'm trying to do something that's a tad out of the ordinary and am having trouble getting my ducks in a row. I subscribe to a number of fairly verbose mailing lists and prefer to receive them as digests since my mail client (vm inside xemacs) has great tools for bursting digests and letting me z