Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [...]
> If you're not subscribed and don't want copies anyway, set your own MFT
> header saying so, which would prevent the list from guessing otherwise.
> If the user has set MFT explicitly, the list should probably not mess
> with it.
If the user has explicitly
Am 2006-03-21 14:57:07, schrieb MJ Ray:
> Not at all sure! It seems it was finally fixed in debian version
> 1.5.6-20040722+1 (CVS snapshot 20040722), closing Bug 49048.
This maybe the case for List-*, but under 1.2 (Potato)
I had allready listreply. Cheched for some seconds and
it was allready
Sorry for the late answer, but I was in Turkey.
Am 2006-03-13 20:20:00, schrieb Benjamin Seidenberg:
> How many Joe/Jane users do you think can handle the complexity and
> different paradigm required by mutt? These mailers are easy to use, and
The question is:What is complex?
I have split
Sorry, for the late answer, but I was in Turkey...
(creating a new enterprise in Denizli/Ankara)
Am 2006-03-22 12:15:29, schrieb Sven Mueller:
> Huh? I do just that on a regular basis. And Thunderbird doesn't load
> external pics from mails in either online or offline mode unless you
I do not me
Am 2006-03-20 14:37:53, schrieb MJ Ray:
> You mean like mutt, which does not respect standards and
> implements the buggy non-standard Mail-Followup-To, while not
The "Mail-Followup-To:" works perfectly.
> implementing standards like List-* headers? I'm ill-placed to
??? - It works perfectly
On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 10:40:02AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> It looks at which reply interface control was used. After all,
> it is user choice whether or not they honour the CC request.
That just offloads the burden of magically knowing whether the poster
wanted a CC or not to the user. Which head
Michelle Konzack wrote on 18/03/2006 22:28:
> Am 2006-03-13 16:02:18, schrieb Margarita Manterola:
>
>>Thunderbird is a very respected MUA. There's a big group of people
>>who don't feel comfortable writing mails from mutt (or the like), and
>>I don't think it's such a good idea to take into acco
"Matthew R. Dempsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 02:56:45PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > So, if mutt finally has List-Post support, what would munging
> > the non-standard MFT header onto all list posts add?
>
> Two users post to a mailing list. One is already subscribed and doesn'
On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 02:56:45PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> So, if mutt finally has List-Post support, what would munging
> the non-standard MFT header onto all list posts add?
Two users post to a mailing list. One is already subscribed and doesn't
want a CC. The other is not subscribed and does
Brett Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Interesting... how sure are you that mutt doesn't respect List-*
> headers? (It's been a lng time since I added any list config in my
> muttrc, it's not been anywhere near as long since I joined a new list,
> and weirdly "l" just works).
Not at all sure! It s
* Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-18 22:44:13 +0100]:
> Am 2006-03-14 12:13:50, schrieb Manoj Srivastava:
>
> > If these Jane/Joe users want a reliable copy of the message,
> > then they should subscribe to the mailing list -- or hope that an
> > explicit request for a CC
On Mon, Mar 20, 2006 at 02:37:53PM +, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Feel free and write bugreports against those MUA's which lakes
> > of features and do not respect standards... This will make
> > the life of GUI/Point-and-Click $USERS much easie
Michelle Konzack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Feel free and write bugreports against those MUA's which lakes
> of features and do not respect standards... This will make
> the life of GUI/Point-and-Click $USERS much easier...
You mean like mutt, which does not respect standards and
implements the buggy
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 10:10:47PM +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> I am on the Debian mailinglists since 04/1999 and never had
> problems with the lists.
Basically, it's usually the other way around.
> I do not know, what we can do with such thread
One resists the urge to participate.
Greetin
Am 2006-03-17 09:49:19, schrieb Matthias Julius:
> Sven Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'm still waiting for anyone to recommend a MUA which works on at least
> > Linux and Windows (yes, that evil OS), preferably also on MacOSX and
> > supports MFT.
>
> Gnus.
Mutt
> Others might be a
Am 2006-03-16 21:33:18, schrieb Sven Mueller:
> I'm still waiting for anyone to recommend a MUA which works on at least
> Linux and Windows (yes, that evil OS), preferably also on MacOSX and
> supports MFT.
You should use "mutt", which works on linux, BeOS, MacOSX and
since some time now on Win32
Am 2006-03-14 12:13:50, schrieb Manoj Srivastava:
> If these Jane/Joe users want a reliable copy of the message,
> then they should subscribe to the mailing list -- or hope that an
> explicit request for a CC is honored. Nothing actually guarantees a CC
> anyway -- but setting MFT incre
Am 2006-03-13 20:20:00, schrieb Benjamin Seidenberg:
> How many Joe/Jane users do you think can handle the complexity and
> different paradigm required by mutt? These mailers are easy to use, and
> are well integrated into the desktop environment. Most importantly, they
> offer GUI/Point-and-Cl
Am 2006-03-13 16:02:18, schrieb Margarita Manterola:
> Thunderbird is a very respected MUA. There's a big group of people
> who don't feel comfortable writing mails from mutt (or the like), and
> I don't think it's such a good idea to take into account only people
> who can use a console-client t
Am 2006-03-15 11:11:18, schrieb Wouter Verhelst:
> Whoa, then you must not like many mail clients.
:-)
> Manoj, there are little mail clients who allow to add arbitrary headers
> to mails. Really. The only exceptions are console-based clients, like
> mutt and gnus. I don't even think Pine can do
Am 2006-03-13 11:05:50, schrieb Manoj Srivastava:
> > Thunderbird, as well as many other MUAs doesn't allow you to set
> > arbitrary headers, including M-F-T.
>
> I guess it is time to move to a more capable MUA, no?
FullACK!
I am on the Debian mailinglists since 04/1999 and never had
p
Am 2006-03-11 02:42:27, schrieb Matthias Julius:
> I am using Gnus. I have it setup to send followups to the list only.
> When I do a followup it goes to the list, a reply goes to the sender
> and a "very wide reply" goes to both. I wonder what the group-reply
> command in mutt does.
r Re
Am 2006-03-03 19:28:50, schrieb Glenn Maynard:
> It's even worse with complex cross-posting, where several lists and several
> individuals are being copied. Neither list-reply nor group-reply does the
Can you imagin, that peoples hate cros-postres?
Cross-Posting is DISCURAGED!!!
Greetings
M
Am 2006-03-11 01:34:09, schrieb Glenn Maynard:
> On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 12:49:00AM -0500, Matthias Julius wrote:
> > Anyway, since MFT is not a formal standard does your MUA not have an
> > easy way to CC the sender?
>
> Mutt has a configuration var somewhere to tell it whether to CC or not
> by
Hi John,
Am 2006-03-01 09:48:45, schrieb John H. Robinson, IV:
> In the signature would probably be poor, as the lowlighting would hide
> it, and who really reads the signatures, anyway? The best place is
> probably right before the signature. A simple one line things: Please cc
> me, I am not su
Am 2006-03-02 04:25:27, schrieb Glenn Maynard:
> Just as a thought, I wonder if it's possible for the list software to
> automatically add an MFT header, if it's missing, indicating that only
> people not subscribed to the list, or explicitly in the CC list, should
> be CC'd.
The "Mail-Followup-T
David Weinehall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I still haven't seen any quoted/referenced reason that makes sense.
> Then again, it might not ever become a standard, but it's the best
> solution for the problem existing. Until someone comes up with
> something better, I'll go with M-F-T (not that
David Weinehall wrote on 17/03/2006 08:53:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 09:33:18PM +0100, Sven Mueller wrote:
>
>>David Weinehall wrote on 13/03/2006 18:32:
>>
>>>you can also do a little prefs hackery:
>>>
>>>http://www.semergence.com/archives/2004/12/09/09/07/
>>
> http://kb.mozillazine.org/Custom_
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 09:33:18PM +0100, Sven Mueller wrote:
> I'm still waiting for anyone to recommend a MUA which works on at least
> Linux and Windows (yes, that evil OS), preferably also on MacOSX and
> supports MFT.
http://www.geocities.com/win32mutt/win32.html
--
Fun will now commence
Sven Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm still waiting for anyone to recommend a MUA which works on at least
> Linux and Windows (yes, that evil OS), preferably also on MacOSX and
> supports MFT.
Gnus.
Others might be available under Cygwin.
Matthias
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 09:33:18PM +0100, Sven Mueller wrote:
> David Weinehall wrote on 13/03/2006 18:32:
> >>Thunderbird, as well as many other MUAs doesn't allow you to set
> >>arbitrary headers, including M-F-T.
> >
> > There are plugins for Thunderbird that solves that (mnehy, for
> > instan
David Weinehall wrote on 13/03/2006 18:32:
>>Thunderbird, as well as many other MUAs doesn't allow you to set
>>arbitrary headers, including M-F-T.
>
> There are plugins for Thunderbird that solves that (mnehy, for
> instance);
Would like to _any_ extension/plugin which really solves that (or, b
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 15 Mar 2006, Matthias Julius verbalised:
>
>> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> I do know how to use Gnus, thanks.
>>
>> I am sorry if I have insulted you. I did not want to suggest you
>> don't know how to use your MUA. But, h
On 15 Mar 2006, Wouter Verhelst stated:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 12:22:46PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On 13 Mar 2006, Margarita Manterola stated:
>>
>>> On 3/13/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11 Mar 2006, Benjamin Seidenberg stated:
> Thunderbird, as well as m
On 15 Mar 2006, Matthias Julius verbalised:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I do know how to use Gnus, thanks.
>
> I am sorry if I have insulted you. I did not want to suggest you
> don't know how to use your MUA. But, how do I know?
Please do apt0cache show gnus |
Matthias Julius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I do know how to use Gnus, thanks.
> I am sorry if I have insulted you. I did not want to suggest you don't
> know how to use your MUA. But, how do I know? Nobody's perfect. I
> doubt there
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 12:13:50PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Err, who said anything about mutt? I have never used that
> program, since when I tested it out I found it kinda under powered,
> and lacked extensibility.
Sir, your insult cannot go unremarked! I demand satisfaction and
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I do know how to use Gnus, thanks.
I am sorry if I have insulted you. I did not want to suggest you
don't know how to use your MUA. But, how do I know? Nobody's
perfect. I doubt there is anyone who knows all commands in Gnus.
> It is w
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> Manoj, there are little mail clients who allow to add arbitrary headers
> to mails. Really. The only exceptions are console-based clients, like
IMO the proper and mature MUAs all do. The immature ones (particullary
those which focus on bells-and-whist
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 11:11:18AM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 12:22:46PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > On 13 Mar 2006, Margarita Manterola stated:
> >
> > > On 3/13/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> On 11 Mar 2006, Benjamin Seidenberg stated:
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 12:22:46PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On 13 Mar 2006, Margarita Manterola stated:
>
> > On 3/13/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On 11 Mar 2006, Benjamin Seidenberg stated:
> >>> Thunderbird, as well as many other MUAs doesn't allow you to set
> >>
On 14 Mar 2006, Matthias Julius spake thusly:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> If I notice the request, and don't feel disinclined, I may add a
>> CC. My "consideration" for their handicaps stops when such
>> consideration turns out to be to much of a bother at the
>> moment. Wh
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Quite. My MUA makes the former automated, and the latter is
> manually adding a CC, which, while not difficult, is still a manual
> action.
See my other post.
> I really don't care. I don't ask for private CC's; if I want
> an a
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If I notice the request, and don't feel disinclined, I may add
> a CC. My "consideration" for their handicaps stops when such
> consideration turns out to be to much of a bother at the moment. What
> about consideration for my time and eff
On 13 Mar 2006, Margarita Manterola stated:
> On 3/13/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 11 Mar 2006, Benjamin Seidenberg stated:
>>> Thunderbird, as well as many other MUAs doesn't allow you to set
>>> arbitrary headers, including M-F-T.
>> I guess it is time to move to a more
On 13 Mar 2006, Matthias Julius told this:
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> It is unacceptable to people who want a CC? They are the ones
>> asking for a favour. If they want a special treatment, different
>> from the default mailing list policy, either they put that favour
>>
On 13 Mar 2006, Benjamin Seidenberg uttered the following:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
>> I guess it is time to move to a more capable MUA, no?
>>
>> manoj
>>
>>
> How many Joe/Jane users do you think can handle the complexity and
> different paradigm required by mutt?
Err, who said anyth
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
I guess it is time to move to a more capable MUA, no?
manoj
How many Joe/Jane users do you think can handle the complexity and
different paradigm required by mutt? These mailers are easy to use, and
are well integrated into the desktop environment. Mos
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It is unacceptable to people who want a CC? They are the ones
> asking for a favour. If they want a special treatment, different
> from the default mailing list policy, either they put that favour
> request in a manner I am going to respon
On 3/13/06, Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11 Mar 2006, Benjamin Seidenberg stated:
> > Thunderbird, as well as many other MUAs doesn't allow you to set
> > arbitrary headers, including M-F-T.
> I guess it is time to move to a more capable MUA, no?
Thunderbird is a very r
On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 12:11:01PM -0500, Benjamin Seidenberg wrote:
> Glenn Maynard wrote:
>
> >
> >I'm also failing to see any reasons people would *not* set M-F-T if they
> >want CCs (or if they specifically don't; Debian lists aside, most other
> >lists have no such policy). I'm not charged f
On 12 Mar 2006, MJ Ray told this:
> Apply your expectations to yourself. Don't push the work to handle
> your mail client's exceptional support for a non-standard buggy
> header onto everyone who requests a CC. It's unacceptable.
It is unacceptable to people who want a CC? They are the o
On 11 Mar 2006, Benjamin Seidenberg stated:
> Glenn Maynard wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm also failing to see any reasons people would *not* set M-F-T if
>> they want CCs (or if they specifically don't; Debian lists aside,
>> most other lists have no such policy). I'm not charged for email
>> on a per-heade
Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 07:56:42PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
I continue to think that you have not read the DRUMS discussions.
No insult is meant, but you show no signs of having done so.
I read the messages you linked. They complained that it's not a standard
and ass
On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 07:56:42PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> I continue to think that you have not read the DRUMS discussions.
> No insult is meant, but you show no signs of having done so.
I read the messages you linked. They complained that it's not a standard
and asserted, without explanation, th
On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 07:56:20PM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> I frequently post to lists that I am not subscribed to and don't
> want a CC for. I either get the messages through a remailer or
> another access method (NNTP, web archives later, and so on).
I don't see how that differs from being subscri
Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 09:35:36AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> >
> > Sorry, I still think you seem not to have
> > followed the references. There are reasons why
> > draft-ietf-drums-mail-followup-to-00.txt wasn't accepted. I
> > will not present them again here, bec
Glenn Maynard wrote:
I'm also failing to see any reasons people would *not* set M-F-T if they
want CCs (or if they specifically don't; Debian lists aside, most other
lists have no such policy). I'm not charged for email on a per-header
basis; there's no drawback to setting it.
Thunderbird,
Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mutt has a configuration var somewhere to tell it whether to CC or not
> by default on list followups. I have it set not to, and I have to add
> the CC manually if I want it. I'm sure Mutt is capable enough that it's
> possible to bind a key to "enable
On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 12:49:00AM -0500, Matthias Julius wrote:
> Anyway, since MFT is not a formal standard does your MUA not have an
> easy way to CC the sender?
Mutt has a configuration var somewhere to tell it whether to CC or not
by default on list followups. I have it set not to, and I hav
Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We're talking about the case of people who want to be treated exceptionally;
> on Debian lists, those are people who *do* want to receive CC's on replies.
> (The original topic of the tangent, of having the list also tweak MFT to
> help specify list poli
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 10:58:35PM -0500, Matthias Julius wrote:
> Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I don't consider it my responsibility to *manually* adjust each of my
> > replies to suit the preferences of the person I'm replying to, which is
> > why I don't always honor requests
Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't consider it my responsibility to *manually* adjust each of my
> replies to suit the preferences of the person I'm replying to, which is
> why I don't always honor requests to CC. Instead, I let people know how
> they can express their preference
On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 02:45:47PM +0100, Sven Mueller wrote:
> Glenn Maynard wrote on 07/03/2006 01:05:
> > It is your job to set MFT if you want my mailer to treat you differently
> > than everyone else, such as if you want to receive CCs on list posts.
>
> Why? MFT isn't an accepted standard. I
Sven Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> their mail client and/or switch to mutt (which is the only mail client I
> know which supports MFT).
For the record, Gnus supports MFT too.
--
* Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P) *
* PGP public key availab
Bernhard R. Link wrote on 07/03/2006 18:39:
> * Sven Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060307 14:46]:
>
>>I don't say that the idea behind MFT is a bad idea (actually, many
>>aspects of it _do_ make sense), but until it is accepted as a standard,
>>it is (IMHO) stupid to ask people to tweak their MUAs
* Sven Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060307 14:46]:
> I don't say that the idea behind MFT is a bad idea (actually, many
> aspects of it _do_ make sense), but until it is accepted as a standard,
> it is (IMHO) stupid to ask people to tweak their MUAs to set and handle it.
It does not matter if it i
Glenn Maynard wrote on 07/03/2006 01:05:
> It is your job to set MFT if you want my mailer to treat you differently
> than everyone else, such as if you want to receive CCs on list posts.
Why? MFT isn't an accepted standard. It also isn't implemented in too
many MUAs (mozilla/thunderbird just bein
On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 09:35:36AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > I read them, and they seem to say "it's not an annointed standard" (not
> > relevant) and "it's a header, put it in the body instead" (which is
> > naming a poor alternative, not naming a problem with MFT).
>
> Sorry, I still think you se
Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 11:06:46AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Neither? So you still didn't bother with the reference?
> >
> > The problems are cited: maybe you don't agree they are problems.
>
> I read them, and they seem to say "it's not an annointed standard" (
On Sun, Mar 05, 2006 at 11:06:46AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Neither? So you still didn't bother with the reference?
>
> The problems are cited: maybe you don't agree they are problems.
I read them, and they seem to say "it's not an annointed standard" (not
relevant) and "it's a header, put it in th
Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 01:31:31AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > Please see my other message and look up the DRUMS reference:
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2006/03/msg3.html
> > For another person complaining about the brokenness of MFT, see
> > http:
On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 01:31:31AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Please see my other message and look up the DRUMS reference:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2006/03/msg3.html
> For another person complaining about the brokenness of MFT, see
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2006/03/ms
Floris Bruynooghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> [...] Only on direct replies this
> request will be preserved, after that the request could be easily
> stipped by accident. [...]
Well, the same is more true for MFT, especially when it hits a
user agent that doesn't support that non-standard, as it wouldn'
On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 01:31:31AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 10:12:58AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > > I'm sure it's possible, but I think encouraging that broken
> > > non-standard header is a bad idea. It is not that hard for
> > > people to
Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 10:12:58AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> > I'm sure it's possible, but I think encouraging that broken
> > non-standard header is a bad idea. It is not that hard for
> > people to control their mail clients correctly IMO.
>
> You say "broken he
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 10:12:58AM +, MJ Ray wrote:
> Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [...]
> > Just as a thought, I wonder if it's possible for the list software to
> > automatically add an MFT header, if it's missing, indicating that only
> > people not subscribed to the list, or explicitly
Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [...]
> Just as a thought, I wonder if it's possible for the list software to
> automatically add an MFT header, if it's missing, indicating that only
> people not subscribed to the list, or explicitly in the CC list, should
> be CC'd. [...]
I'm sure it's possible
On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 05:22:49AM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> I'm sorry that you cannot remember, but perhaps you could use procmail
> or something similar to make sure that this header is always set
> according to each list policy. Also, you could set up mutt to do
> different things for di
Brian M. Carlson wrote:
>
> Mutt has several different reply options, some of them may be more
> appropriate than others. Anyway, it does not matter: the Debian Mailing
> List Code of Conduct *explicitly* says:
>
> When replying to messages on the mailing list, do not send a carbon
> copy (C
On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 02:46 +0100, Gabor Gombas wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 01:04:17AM +, Brian M. Carlson wrote:
> > However, the code of conduct seems to
> > point out that one should not Cc someone unless they specifically ask
> > for it (a guideline that you neglected to follow, after
81 matches
Mail list logo
