Greetings Moderators!
I moderated the message below just now (one of two identical
test messages). I rejected it, with a covering note to the
author (John Munroe <munddr at gmail.com>, who does not appear
to be subscribed to the list) that I was doing so because
approving it would serve no useful purpose, and pointing out
that it had been held because the message headers matched a
filter rule, probably because it was (a) from gmail.com and
(b) sent via nabble.
I then also ticked the box for it to be forwarded to r-help-owner,
expecting that my covering note would accompany it. Since that did
not happen, I'm now adding an explanation!
I would suspect that John Munro has been trying to get through
to R-help, and failing, as the most likely explanation for
sending test messages.
I feel this sort of thing is adding weight to the case for
trying to alleviate the severity with which mailman treats
messages from this kind of origin. What do others think?
Ted.
On 07-Jun-10 13:26:49, John Munroe wrote:>
> Test
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://r.789695.n4.nabble.com/Test-tp2245933p2245933.html
> Sent from the R help mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <Ted.Harding at manchester.ac.uk>
Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861
Date: 07-Jun-10 Time: 14:59:49
------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------