>Date:    Sun, 4 Dec 1994 05:19:52 -0800
>From:    [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Bounce Terminations
>
>        Oh Boy !!!  Rockey & Squeekers are in seventh heaven with all the
>scraps from the shredder after todays edition(s) of the FML list were
>printed.  We now see what Chris meant by the difficulty of handling 'bouncey
>terminations'.  When a copy comes back as undeliverable, it is not a
>submission but has to be removed right away and not sent out again.  If it
>hapens a second or (God help us) a third time, the FML could get REALLY big.
>. . . . . . ., but you knew that anyway Bill, don't you ???  (Smile).
 
>[ Yeah ... too well ... we run 85 lists here. Sigh.  BIG]
 
Sigh indeed.  Bill, I had an incoming filter that threw away any messages
that contained phrases from the introduction.  If I remember correctly,
I triggered on this:
 
        "Messages pertaining to the FML should be sent to:"
 
And, rather than insert them directly into the outgoing digest, I put
them into a "bounces" mailbox which I checked periodically to see whether
it was someone trying to reply and didn't know how to use their editor.
I frequently got 2-3 bounces to my address (rather than to the LISTSERV)
*per* day.  None of these messages was *ever* a legitimate reply.
--
Every once in a while I write something that someone might use
in a signature.  So I go back and make it real spiffy.  No luck.
Then some guy goes and uses *that* dog.  Argh!
[Posted in FML issue 1034]