Phil, (01)
> Accordingly, I have just added the following 3 addresses to the
> "auto-accept" filter:
>
> //
> nls-restore-bounces@chm.cim3.net
> nls-technical-bounces@chm.cim3.net
> nls-legal-bounces@chm.cim3.net
> //
>
> ... let's see if that helps fix the problem. (02)
That did not seem to work because I saw the "Re: [nls-technical]
[hyperscope-dev] new docs" message from Jonathan with the
timestamp "Tue, 28 Feb 2006 07:31:33 -0800" subsequently, and
that evidently did not get into the [nls-archive] automatically
(it's still pending approval as of this writing.) (03)
While we'll need to look into the matter further, I have now
disabled the daily clean-up of all pending messages (something we
do as a routine, to get rid of spam messages that may tend to
pile up.) That means, you could take your time to go and approve
those "pending message", say, taking care of them on a daily
basis, or something. ... However, if you noticed that "spam
messages" do get piled up as a result (because you'll have to get
rid of them yourself now), please make sure you let me know (so
that we'll think of some other workaround.) (04)
Thanks & regards. =ppy
-- (05)
Peter P. Yim wrote Tue, 28 Feb 2006 07:10:02 -0800:
> Phil,
>
> Thank you for the input.
>
> I just went to the "approval pending" page for [nls-archive], but you've
> already dealt with that message (and its not there any more) ... and
> therefore, I cannot investigate further by taking a look at the message.
>
> When messages are distributed to me, my mail client shows the header as
> something like:
>
> //
> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 09:35:49 -0800
> From: Jonathan Cheyer <jonathan@cheyer.biz>
> To: Philip Gust <gust@NouveauSystems.com>
> Subject: Re: [nls-technical] Keyset mappings
> Sender: nls-technical-bounces@chm.cim3.net
> Reply-To: NLS Restoration Technical Discussion <nls-technical@chm.cim3.net>
> //
>
> However, (now that you're bringing it up), I remember having seen others
> who have mail clients showing the header as (using the above example)
> something like:
>
> //
> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 09:35:49 -0800
> From: <nls-technical-bounces@chm.cim3.net> on behalf of Jonathan Cheyer
> <jonathan@cheyer.biz>
> To: Philip Gust <gust@NouveauSystems.com>
> Subject: Re: [nls-technical] Keyset mappings
> Reply-To: NLS Restoration Technical Discussion <nls-technical@chm.cim3.net>
> //
>
> ... maybe this is why it is not automatically accepting the message
> (assuming my messages did get archived without your intervention).
>
> Accordingly, I have just added the following 3 addresses to the
> "auto-accept" filter:
>
> //
> nls-restore-bounces@chm.cim3.net
> nls-technical-bounces@chm.cim3.net
> nls-legal-bounces@chm.cim3.net
> //
>
> ... let's see if that helps fix the problem.
>
> Regards. =ppy
> -- (06)
> Philip Gust wrote Tue, 28 Feb 2006 05:25:16 -0800:
>> Peter,
>>
>> The problem is definitely related to CC-ing nls-technical or
>> nls-legal. Jonathan just sent a note to the Verizon legal group and
>> CCd nls-legal. There is an approval request pending for his message
>> in nls-archive that I'm just getting ready to take care of. I believe
>> that this is a bug in the cim3 software or our in configuration that
>> you'll want to address, since it is a very useful pattern that other
>> groups could benefit from. (07)
>> At 03:08 PM 2/27/2006, you wrote:
>>> Phil,
>>>
>>> > "Blind carbon copies or other implicit destinations are
>>> > not allowed.
>>>
>>> I am aware that that is disallowed (probably for good reasons). We
>>> need to work within that constraint -- i.e. use "c.c." and not
>>> "b.c.c." for the purpose. Or, if "b.c.c." needs to be used, go on and
>>> approve the post right away.
>>>
>>> > Somehow, the system turns what is sent to the nls-archive
>>> > list into a BCC or other implicit destination.
>>>
>>> I don't think that is the case ... my last message to you got into
>>> [nls-archive] properly (I think), without administrator intervention.
>>> Let's look at this one again, and see what happens. -- try NOT to
>>> approve this, even if you got asked to, but let's follow-up (maybe
>>> even via the phone) on it quickly.
>>>
>>> I'm including Jonathan in the conversation ... he probably knows more
>>> than I do.
>>>
>>> Regards. =ppy
>>> -- (08)
>>> PhilipGust wrote Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:41:37 -0800:
>>>> The details page states the reason as:
>>>> "Blind carbon copies or other implicit destinations are not allowed.
>>>> Try reposting your message by explicitly including the list address
>>>> in the To: or Cc: fields.". We often CC the nls-technical or
>>>> nls-legal list, for example. Somehow, the system turns what is sent
>>>> to the nls-archive list into a BCC or other implicit destination.
>>>> Could you check on how this is being done to see if that's the case? (09)
>>>> At 08:57 AM 2/27/2006, you wrote:
>>>>> Phil,
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you tell (from the admin message) "why" you would need to
>>>>> approve them?
>>>>>
>>>>> The [nls-archive] list should be configured with "the union of all
>>>>> other list-memberships" (i.e. everyone from nls-restore,
>>>>> nls-technical, and nls-legal ... etc.) being treated as "auto
>>>>> accept" for posting. That configuration option can be found on the
>>>>> page: http://chm.cim3.net/mailman/admin/nls-archive/privacy/sender
>>>>>
>>>>> When I started the list, I've already done that ... but if you are
>>>>> adding new subscribers to anyone of the other lists, this
>>>>> "auto-accept" lists needs to be similarly expanded. (see:
>>>>> http://chm.cim3.net/forum/nls-archive/2005-11/msg00001.html#nid07)
>>>>> Maybe, this is what's causing the problem.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's see if this message gets archived ... if it doesn't
>>>>> (automatically), then maybe the issue is caused by something else.
>>>>> Please check and advise.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers. =ppy
>>>>> -- (010)
>>>>> Philip Gust wrote Mon, 27 Feb 2006 06:36:39 -0800:
>>>>>> Peter,
>>>>>> I find that I'm having to approve every entry into the nls-archive
>>>>>> list. Is there some way to set it so that items from the
>>>>>> nls-restore, nls-technical, and nls-legal go into the archive
>>>>>> without requiring approval of every one?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Philip Gust
>>>>>> Nouveau Systems, Inc.
>>>>>> phone: +1 650 961-7992
>>>>>> fax: +1 520 843-7217
>>>>>>
>>>>>> mailto: gust@NouveauSystems.com (011)
|