Just a bit of a clarification on a comment from some someone who replied off list, but obviously setting your message size limit to "8 or 10 KB" is also going to cause some legitimate posts to come to you for a decision and action, but not as often as you might think. In my experience, a "clean" initial post will get through without delay, either because it is small enough to fit under the limit but also because in my experience RW seems to add several KB to the limit that is set before they actually forward it for moderation. In my experience, I process 1 or perhaps 2 messages in an average day that are moderated for size reason, and that is reasonable IMHO. As I said though, I am retired and spend a lot of time off and on at the computer (just ask my wife!) during an average day, so anything returned to me for moderation is processed with minimal delay and in most cases it is forwarded to the list before the author even notices any delay. David E. Cann decann@infionline.net or on Skype at "david.e.cann" -----Original Message----- From: listowners-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:listowners-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of David E. Cann Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 12:06 PM To: Listowners List Posting Subject: Re: [LO] Digest mode What Joan said. . . . :-) I have found that setting the message size limit at 8 KB seems to work pretty well. That stops nearly all digests as replies, but also the occasional legitimate but large reply, so 10 might work better if you do not spend as much time at your computer as I do. When it bounces to me for action, I forward it to the list if it is not overly problematic or return it to the subscriber if it is, and in both cases I send a private note to the subscriber explaining the reasons. And on the subject of digests themselves, I have over time sent to many of my lists a note pointing out that subscribing in digest is unnecessary and even a disadvantage on all but the more active lists. For example, if a list typically only received 1 or 2 posts on an average day, then the net result of subscribing in digest mode is that a digest subscriber will receive that same post up to a day later than all of the list mode subscribers do. This in addition to the need to edit subject lines of digests and such, and when explained this way I have found that a substantial number of them then ask to be changed to list mode on their own. Just a thought, but it's something to consider. Of course, I am retired and spend a lot of time sitting at this computer on an average day, so I tend to have more time to more closely monitor my lists and follow up on such things than some others do, but that is a factor each of us has to consider in such cases. I talk too much. . . . Happy Independence Day to anyone else out there in the U. S. of A. David E. Cann decann@infionline.net or on Skype at "david.e.cann" -----Original Message----- From: listowners-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:listowners-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of JYoung6180@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 10:38 AM To: DianaGM@dgmweb.net; Listowners-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LO] Digest mode It isn't up to us as admins to force our subscribers to subscribe in one mode or the other. RootsWeb offers digest mode and so must we. If your list gets very little traffic then any quoted digest shouldn't be very long either. So not much of a problem. You can manage lengthy digest quotes by setting a very low message size and then when a longer quoted digest gets stuck in pending requests you can remind the person why this happened. Joan

No, I still have the button. Nan On 7/4/2012 12:30 PM, Johan Dorey-Venter wrote: > Hi All, > . > The Admin Interface seems to have been changed. The "Let me in" button > seems to have been replaced by a text box with the words "Let me > in..." in it, and no button to log in. > . > Has anyone else encountered the same problem? > . > Greetings, > Johan Dorey-Venter. > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LISTOWNERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

What Joan said. . . . :-) I have found that setting the message size limit at 8 KB seems to work pretty well. That stops nearly all digests as replies, but also the occasional legitimate but large reply, so 10 might work better if you do not spend as much time at your computer as I do. When it bounces to me for action, I forward it to the list if it is not overly problematic or return it to the subscriber if it is, and in both cases I send a private note to the subscriber explaining the reasons. And on the subject of digests themselves, I have over time sent to many of my lists a note pointing out that subscribing in digest is unnecessary and even a disadvantage on all but the more active lists. For example, if a list typically only received 1 or 2 posts on an average day, then the net result of subscribing in digest mode is that a digest subscriber will receive that same post up to a day later than all of the list mode subscribers do. This in addition to the need to edit subject lines of digests and such, and when explained this way I have found that a substantial number of them then ask to be changed to list mode on their own. Just a thought, but it's something to consider. Of course, I am retired and spend a lot of time sitting at this computer on an average day, so I tend to have more time to more closely monitor my lists and follow up on such things than some others do, but that is a factor each of us has to consider in such cases. I talk too much. . . . Happy Independence Day to anyone else out there in the U. S. of A. David E. Cann decann@infionline.net or on Skype at "david.e.cann" -----Original Message----- From: listowners-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:listowners-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of JYoung6180@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 10:38 AM To: DianaGM@dgmweb.net; Listowners-L@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LO] Digest mode It isn't up to us as admins to force our subscribers to subscribe in one mode or the other. RootsWeb offers digest mode and so must we. If your list gets very little traffic then any quoted digest shouldn't be very long either. So not much of a problem. You can manage lengthy digest quotes by setting a very low message size and then when a longer quoted digest gets stuck in pending requests you can remind the person why this happened. Joan In a message dated 7/4/2012 6:16:17 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, DianaGM@dgmweb.net writes: Are we allowed to restrict the use of Digest mode on our lists? I am sooooooooo tired of reminding people to trim their backquotes to the *one* message they are responding to and to change the Subject of their reply to the Subject of the message. This isn't happening every once in awhile, it's happening every few days. I've even moderated one person, refusing to let his messages through unless he fixes them - and he continues to forget. My list just isn't that busy. There's no need to subscribe in Digest mode, and even if my list were busy, there are better ways to deal with it than Digest mode. I truly wish Digest mode did not exist, and I would like to not allow people to subscribe in that mode. Diana

It isn't up to us as admins to force our subscribers to subscribe in one mode or the other. RootsWeb offers digest mode and so must we. If your list gets very little traffic then any quoted digest shouldn't be very long either. So not much of a problem. You can manage lengthy digest quotes by setting a very low message size and then when a longer quoted digest gets stuck in pending requests you can remind the person why this happened. Joan In a message dated 7/4/2012 6:16:17 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, DianaGM@dgmweb.net writes: Are we allowed to restrict the use of Digest mode on our lists? I am sooooooooo tired of reminding people to trim their backquotes to the *one* message they are responding to and to change the Subject of their reply to the Subject of the message. This isn't happening every once in awhile, it's happening every few days. I've even moderated one person, refusing to let his messages through unless he fixes them - and he continues to forget. My list just isn't that busy. There's no need to subscribe in Digest mode, and even if my list were busy, there are better ways to deal with it than Digest mode. I truly wish Digest mode did not exist, and I would like to not allow people to subscribe in that mode. Diana ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to LISTOWNERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Are we allowed to restrict the use of Digest mode on our lists? I am sooooooooo tired of reminding people to trim their backquotes to the *one* message they are responding to and to change the Subject of their reply to the Subject of the message. This isn't happening every once in awhile, it's happening every few days. I've even moderated one person, refusing to let his messages through unless he fixes them - and he continues to forget. My list just isn't that busy. There's no need to subscribe in Digest mode, and even if my list were busy, there are better ways to deal with it than Digest mode. I truly wish Digest mode did not exist, and I would like to not allow people to subscribe in that mode. Diana

Here what I do, I unsub them from Digest mode and sub them on mail mode. No ands, ifs or buts. The poster gets the message in an hurry. Never failed because it worked every time. No one ever complained. David S. On 7/4/2012 4:09 AM, Diana Gale Matthiesen wrote: > Are we allowed to restrict the use of Digest mode on our lists? I am > sooooooooo tired of reminding people to trim their backquotes to the > *one* message they are responding to and to change the Subject of > their reply to the Subject of the message. This isn't happening every > once in awhile, it's happening every few days. I've even moderated > one person, refusing to let his messages through unless he fixes them > - and he continues to forget. > > My list just isn't that busy. There's no need to subscribe in Digest > mode, and even if my list were busy, there are better ways to deal > with it than Digest mode. I truly wish Digest mode did not exist, and > I would like to not allow people to subscribe in that mode. > > Diana

make a message filter for content send to trash. If message contains " Key Account Manager Position " send to trash - some mail clients word it different. But you can do this with most all clients. If you want good admin mail, use the content filter to folder those. I use several Authorization is requested Excessive or fatal bounces has been removed list admin messages [LO] listowners mail list sub request non-member subscribe unsubscribe uncaught all these and a couple more are content filter to folder and its all separated nicely. A glance tells me I have new messages in them. All other unfiltered mail end up in the inbox, most cases its all spam. People who run solely on the inbox with out filters are just adding to the work they wont have to do once you run filters. Gets rid of a lot of guess work. I rarely open the uncaught ones, some times they have live spam in them. If they are repeated to many times I check to see why, some times a member has something blocked. Its just as easy to filter spam out. No if rw would do same, we would have less spam too, subject line , most all spam has no RE: or they have a lot of ? marks. Dan M ----- Original Message ----- From: "MargM" <genknut@exemail.com.au> To: "Darrell A. Martin" <darrellm@sprynet.com>; <listowners@rootsweb.com> Sent: Monday, July 02, 2012 7:24 PM Subject: Re: [LO] Pesky SPAMMERS > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Darrell A. Martin" <darrellm@sprynet.com> > To: <listowners@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 9:20 AM > Subject: Re: [LO] Pesky SPAMMERS > > >> On 7/2/2012 5:40 PM, MargM wrote: >>> >>> >>> In the past day or so I have had a handful of SPAM emails sent >>> to >>> the admin addresses of the lists I admin. >>> This morning I deleted 30 . I rarely use these addresses. In >>> fact for 2 of the quietest lists , I never have. >>> So dunno where spammers are accessing these. >>> >>> Cant tag& delete as SPAM either so just a time waster >> >> Marg: >> >> If one of your subscribers has the admin address in their >> address book, >> and their e-mail gets compromised, that would do it. >> Regardless, you are >> right, it's a time waster although not a horrible one unless >> the volume >> gets ridiculous. >> > Hi Darrell > Not possible for at least 2 of my very quiet lists . These emails > are allegedly from 3 list admin address and sent to same 3 > > In part they read quote: > > We have an excellent opportunity for an apprentice applicant to > join a rapidly expanding company. > > An at home Key Account Manager Position (Ref: 11599-581/2HR) is a > great opportunity for stay at home parents or anyone who wants to > work in the comfort of their own home. > This is a genuine offer and not to be confused with scams! > > > end quote > > Just who are they kidding ! Its now mid day local time and just > had 6 more > > Been a list admin for a fair few years and dont recall SPAM from > this angle before. Its just a complete time waster > > Also received 3 similar messages this morning posted to the > lists message posting address which have got caught as > unsubscibers . > > All part of a list admins life ! > > Bye > > MargM > Beautiful NSW Central Coast > Australia > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > LISTOWNERS-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Joyce, Joan is right, and if you tell me which address to send it to I will send you something if you want to really make sure it is (or isn't working). David E. Cann decann@infionline.net or on Skype at "david.e.cann" -----Original Message----- From: listowners-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:listowners-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of JYoung6180@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 4:58 PM To: bjreece@bellsouth.net; Listowners@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [LO] not receiving admin mail Check to be sure the correct email address is entered in the admin email box on each list's admin page. What have you done to verify that you are not getting admin mail...I mean how do you KNOW mail IS being sent to your admin address? If all you are missing is admin addresses spam--it could be that your ISP is blocking the spam at the server level and it isn't even reaching your personal filters. Joan In a message dated 7/3/2012 4:52:48 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, bjreece@bellsouth.net writes: I’m not getting my admin mail. Getting it from the lists I assist on but not administer on. I’ve checked the blocked sender’s list and the addy’s aren’t there. I’ve checked and am still subbed to the lists. They are still showing as lists I administer in ‘my accounts’. I have a ‘ bellsouth.net’ address which is at&t/yahoo. I have the filters all turned off on yahoo because it was bouncing rootsweb mails and nothing I could do would stop it from bouncing so that shouldn’t be an issue either. I’ve had the same address for years so no changes there. Any ideas? Joyce Gaston Reece

Check to be sure the correct email address is entered in the admin email box on each list's admin page. What have you done to verify that you are not getting admin mail...I mean how do you KNOW mail IS being sent to your admin address? If all you are missing is admin addresses spam--it could be that your ISP is blocking the spam at the server level and it isn't even reaching your personal filters. Joan In a message dated 7/3/2012 4:52:48 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, bjreece@bellsouth.net writes: I’m not getting my admin mail. Getting it from the lists I assist on but not administer on. I’ve checked the blocked sender’s list and the addy’s aren’t there. I’ve checked and am still subbed to the lists. They are still showing as lists I administer in ‘my accounts’. I have a ‘ bellsouth.net’ address which is at&t/yahoo. I have the filters all turned off on yahoo because it was bouncing rootsweb mails and nothing I could do would stop it from bouncing so that shouldn’t be an issue either. I’ve had the same address for years so no changes there. Any ideas? Joyce Gaston Reece

I’m not getting my admin mail. Getting it from the lists I assist on but not administer on. I’ve checked the blocked sender’s list and the addy’s aren’t there. I’ve checked and am still subbed to the lists. They are still showing as lists I administer in ‘my accounts’. I have a ‘bellsouth.net’ address which is at&t/yahoo. I have the filters all turned off on yahoo because it was bouncing rootsweb mails and nothing I could do would stop it from bouncing so that shouldn’t be an issue either. I’ve had the same address for years so no changes there. Any ideas? Joyce Gaston Reece

----- Original Message ----- From: "Darrell A. Martin" <darrellm@sprynet.com> To: <listowners@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 9:20 AM Subject: Re: [LO] Pesky SPAMMERS > On 7/2/2012 5:40 PM, MargM wrote: >> >> >> In the past day or so I have had a handful of SPAM emails sent >> to >> the admin addresses of the lists I admin. >> This morning I deleted 30 . I rarely use these addresses. In >> fact for 2 of the quietest lists , I never have. >> So dunno where spammers are accessing these. >> >> Cant tag& delete as SPAM either so just a time waster > > Marg: > > If one of your subscribers has the admin address in their > address book, > and their e-mail gets compromised, that would do it. > Regardless, you are > right, it's a time waster although not a horrible one unless > the volume > gets ridiculous. > Hi Darrell Not possible for at least 2 of my very quiet lists . These emails are allegedly from 3 list admin address and sent to same 3 In part they read quote: We have an excellent opportunity for an apprentice applicant to join a rapidly expanding company. An at home Key Account Manager Position (Ref: 11599-581/2HR) is a great opportunity for stay at home parents or anyone who wants to work in the comfort of their own home. This is a genuine offer and not to be confused with scams! end quote Just who are they kidding ! Its now mid day local time and just had 6 more Been a list admin for a fair few years and dont recall SPAM from this angle before. Its just a complete time waster Also received 3 similar messages this morning posted to the lists message posting address which have got caught as unsubscibers . All part of a list admins life ! Bye MargM Beautiful NSW Central Coast Australia

I've noticed an increase in spam being directed to my *-admin@rootsweb.com addresses in the past week or so. Gmail is rightly picking it all up as spam, and I delete it once I've looked through the spam folder for genuine mail (which doesn't happen often). Wendy Darrell A. Martin said the following on 3/07/2012 11:20 a.m.: > On 7/2/2012 5:40 PM, MargM wrote: >> >> In the past day or so I have had a handful of SPAM emails sent to >> the admin addresses of the lists I admin. >> This morning I deleted 30 . I rarely use these addresses. In >> fact for 2 of the quietest lists , I never have. >> So dunno where spammers are accessing these. >> >> Cant tag& delete as SPAM either so just a time waster > Marg: > > If one of your subscribers has the admin address in their address book, > and their e-mail gets compromised, that would do it. Regardless, you are > right, it's a time waster although not a horrible one unless the volume > gets ridiculous. > > Darrell

In the past day or so I have had a handful of SPAM emails sent to the admin addresses of the lists I admin. This morning I deleted 30 . I rarely use these addresses. In fact for 2 of the quietest lists , I never have. So dunno where spammers are accessing these. Cant tag & delete as SPAM either so just a time waster ............... bye MargM Beautiful NSW Central Coast Australia

On 7/2/2012 5:40 PM, MargM wrote: > > > In the past day or so I have had a handful of SPAM emails sent to > the admin addresses of the lists I admin. > This morning I deleted 30 . I rarely use these addresses. In > fact for 2 of the quietest lists , I never have. > So dunno where spammers are accessing these. > > Cant tag& delete as SPAM either so just a time waster Marg: If one of your subscribers has the admin address in their address book, and their e-mail gets compromised, that would do it. Regardless, you are right, it's a time waster although not a horrible one unless the volume gets ridiculous. Darrell

In my MicroSoft Outlook at the top in the tool bar that starts with Send to the right is a tool marked HTML clicking on the arrow it shows up to set HTML or Plain Text. Frederick M. Dittmar Diggin' Deep Genealogy Research Service PO Box 2601 Norman, Oklahoma 73070 Member -Oklahoma Genealogical Society - http://www.okgensoc.org/ Board Member - OKOLHA - http://www.okolha.net List Administrator for 49 mail lists. 5 State-Ghost Towns / 15 Oklahoma- / 13 Family Surnames / 3 Miscellaneous / 1 Canadian & 12 Province & Territories Ghost Towns lists.

I was looking for the link to show some one how to change to plain text . I did not see it on the home page. Could some one send me the link please. thanks

The following lists are being put up for adoption. If you're interested please contact me off line. Please tell me your reason for wanting the list. Priority goes to subscribers. Thank you, Fred. OK-CITY-DIRECTORIES / OK-LANDRUNS / OK-MIGRATION / OK-MYSTERIES / OK-NEWSPAPERS / OK-OILMEN / OK-ORPHANAGES / OK-POLITICAL-HISTORY / OK-RECORDS / OKBECKHA Frederick M. Dittmar Diggin' Deep Genealogy Research Service PO Box 2601 Norman, Oklahoma 73070 Member -Oklahoma Genealogical Society - http://www.okgensoc.org/ Board Member - OKOLHA - http://www.okolha.net List Administrator for 50 mail lists. Down from 93 5 State-Ghost Towns / 16 Oklahoma- / 13 Family Surnames / 3 Miscellaneous / 1 Canadian & 12 Province & Territories Ghost Towns lists.

My windstream server is removing these before they send them to my computer. They are frequent, almost daily and for various lists I admin. Is it really stopping a virus or is this something else? Mary R. --- Infected Message Summary --- Envelope Sender: mailman-bounces@rootsweb.com Envelope Recipient: Maryiola@windstream.net Detected Virus: "Virus:CMU-201206-1340720971" Subject: Uncaught bounce notification

Precisely. If it isn't included it still MAY work but it is also possible that without the divider/separator it could get mixed up and not work. Joan In a message dated 6/28/2012 2:03:47 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, pleblan@aim.com writes: It is safer to include it. It has something to do with matching. it cuts it off or it allow more. Some one please explain.

At 6-28-2012 02:01 PM, Paul L LeBlanc wrote: >It is safer to include it. It has something to do with matching. it >cuts it off or it allow more. > >Some one please explain. If would guess that it has to do with Regular Expressions (regex). Regular Expressions are a computer language used to do highly sophisticated searches of plain text. "^" means "start this search from the beginning of the line". (I'd also assume that means that the rest of the 'stuff' in the From: line - other than the email address - is stripped before Mailman does its checks.) If anybody is interested in learning more: http://www.regular-expressions.info/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regular_expression