<VV> VirtualVairs post requires approval

[Dennis & Debbie Pleau]

As one of the administrators, I just looked to see how many people we allow 
a message to be addressed to before it is kicked out for too many.  It 
doesn't look to be configurable, so it must be a Mailman default.

It's bigger than four of five but less than the one person on the to line 
and the 21 CC recipients of the message Matt was talking about.  At least a 
couple of the CCs were lists.  The VVs were a CCd lists.

VV-help who administer this list, don't have a lot of rules on what to do 
with posts after they are kicked to the administration site.  We all pretty 
much discard the spam which is 90% of the mail kicked to admins.  I always 
reject and tell the person why when I get a message with 20 recipients, my 
reasoning, is do all those to people want there email address going 
to >1000 people?  I also reject all messages above 8K in size, they are 
almost always messages which include a whole digest while replying to an 
individual message within the digest, I'll ask them to trim the message to 
just the relevant message.  I will usually put through messages which are 
on topic, but come from a non-list member, I'm not sure how the rest of the 
admins handle those.

VV-help probably handles about 15 messages/day and there are 3 or 4 of us 
who take care of it.


Dennis

At 11:18 PM 1/6/2005, Hank Kaczmarek wrote:
>Hi Joe, Craig, et.al.
>
>This is common practice just about everywhere on the internet, except in 
>"Patio Matt's Neighborhood".  When I inquired on the other car list that I 
>belong to about it, everyone who responded said the same thing. They just 
>wanted to be sure that the person that they were replying got a duplicate 
>of the message they were sending.
>
>This has always irritated our current Chairman---never bothered me a bit.
>
>I would think, unless you are replying directly to Matt...., ah, what the 
>hell, do it to him too---there isn't anything in the guidelines currently 
>that says you can't, since no duplicate will end up on the list, and 
>thereby wasting bandwidth.  Matt certainly doesn't have any compunction 
>with crowding my mailbox with unwanted/un-necessary smart-ass replies, 
>that also magically seem to  end up on the list.   whatever trips thy 
>trigger, my friend.
>
>HANK
>Immediate Past Chairman