> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, July 03, 1999 2:47 PM > To: Alex Miller > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: info > > > On Sat, Jul 03, 1999 at 02:27:23PM -0400, Alex Miller wrote: > > It seems then that > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > is not the name you subscribed with. > > > > The message back from ezmlm should have said: > > > > Acknowledgment: I have removed the address > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > from this mailing list. > > > > NOT > > > > Acknowledgment: The address > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > is not on this mailing list. > > > > You must have been subscribed as: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > instead of > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > which you send and recieve mail from both. > > > > It would be nice, if for ezmlm there were the command: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Maybe that could be a cybergood open-source project to write. > > How is it supposed to know who you are, since we're assuming that > the envelope > sender address of the message you send to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > isn't the same as the address you're subscribed under? Precisely. If such a command existed he could have used it. It would work like this. [EMAIL PROTECTED] the response in his case would have been. You are [EMAIL PROTECTED], not a current member of this list. That's just clearer than deduction from failure. He'd still have to read the header but it could part of a proactive procedure to unsubscribe. > > > Anyway, since there isn't an unsubscribe-name=host.domain command > > Certainly there is. If he knew what address he was subscribed > under, he could > send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > He can find out what address he's subscribed under by looking at > the header of > a message from the list. Here's the Return-Path from a message I > received from > this list: > > Return-Path: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > From this I know that I'm subscribed under the address > [EMAIL PROTECTED] If I wanted to get off of the > list I'd send a > message to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'd > get the confirmation back, reply to it, and I'd be off. Oh, I tried it last night before I sent him the message, as at test. I subscribed [EMAIL PROTECTED] then I sent the command [EMAIL PROTECTED] It failed, saying: <snip> The message I received wasn't sent to any of my command addresses. <snip> --- Here are the ezmlm command addresses. I can handle administrative requests automatically. Just send an empty note to any of these addresses: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Receive future messages sent to the mailing list. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Stop receiving messages. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Retrieve a copy of message 12345 from the archive. DO NOT SEND ADMINISTRATIVE REQUESTS TO THE MAILING LIST! If you do, I won't see them, and subscribers will yell at you. To specify [EMAIL PROTECTED] as your subscription address, send mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. I'll send a confirmation message to that address; when you receive that message, simply reply to it to complete your subscription. So, I took that to mean that although [EMAIL PROTECTED] was allowed but [EMAIL PROTECTED] was not, since it wasn't listed and it was rejected. Of course it was rejected because of a misspelling, not because it is not included in the command set. > > Chris >
