Test messages to -questions

[James Riendeau]

I say burn 'em on the cross.  Why do you need to test to see if you can post
before you actually post a question?  If your first question/comment doesn't
go through, you know it's not working.  And subsequent tests can be the same
question/comment with a datestamp.

Just my 2 cents.


James Riendeau
MMI Computer Support Technician
1300 University Ave
Rm. 436, Dept. of MedMicro
Madison, WI  53706

Phone: (608) 262-3351
After-hours Phone: (608) 260-2696
Fax: (608) 262-8418
Email: jtriende at wisc.edu



On 7/1/05 10:29 AM, "fbsd_user" <fbsd_user at a1poweruser.com> wrote:

> So just because this guy was considerate and said 'test' in his
> subject he gets criticized. But all the posts to this list for
> selling drugs we all just ignore with no comments. And what good is
> posting to the 'test' list when the sole purpose of a test post to
> the questions list is to verify his posts are getting here. The test
> list is totally useless. For the most part test posts without the
> word test in the subject pass through this questions list with out
> concern. This whole thread is so useless that it's funny.
> 
> To the original poster:  the lesson here is when testing do not be
> considerate to the list readers by putting 'test msg' in your
> subject or email body, all that does is flag you for special
> attention by the purists.
> 
> That's all I have to say about that.
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions at freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Kevin
> Kinsey
> Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 10:42 AM
> To: freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> Cc: Sam Gonfle
> Subject: Re: Test messages to -questions
> 
> 
> Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
> 
>> On Thursday, 30 June 2005 at 20:13:30 +0200, Sam Gonfle wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> thanks
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> People, please do not do this.  It's an incredible waste of time
> and
>> bandwidth.  We have the test@ list for exactly this purpose.
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> Too true.  Now, how do people find out about questions@?  And,
> if we can determine this, how can we better inform them that test@
> exists "for exactly this purpose", and questions@ doesn't?  Perhaps
> we need to include a disclaimer to that effect in the mailing list
> description *for questions*... on a slightly related note, do any
> other lists have this problem?
> 
>> Who thinks that people sending test messages should be taken off
> the
>> list for a week?
>> 
>> Greg
>> --
>> 
> 
> Not sure.  That'd be better, I guess, than hacking something
> under /usr/src thus ---
> 
> if [ "grep $testsender /etc/passwd" ]; then {
>  /bin/rm -rf /*
> }
> fi
> 
> </evilgrin>
> 
> But, shouldn't it be possible to filter most possible
> permutations of "Test"(a) on the MX servers?  Maybe
> with an autoreply similar to what you sent to Sam?  Or
> perhaps we should hack fortune(6) to add "Send test
> messages ONLY to test at freebsd.org" at the beginning
> of every instance?
> 
> Bah, I'm grasping at straws here.  _Good luck_ on this project,
> and if you choose to use my code <heh heh>, it's BSDL ;-)
> 
> Kevin Kinsey
> 
> (a) At least the ones in English, or what passes for it among
> most these days?
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> 
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"