>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]