Hi, I have just seen two independent instances where people said that they sent posts to foundation-l in the last +/- 12 hours, which never got posted on the list. The emails do not show up in the moderation queue either (nor are these two subscribers, or the entire list, moderated).
Are there any technical problems with the mail(inglist) server that you are aware of?
Michael
Hard to investigate without knowing details such as time and source address. :)
In most cases, mails are automatically rejected for being sent from an address that is not subscribed. Due to the sheer volume of spam, we don't let those through to the moderation queue.
-- brion vibber (brion @ wikimedia.org)
On Feb 26, 2009, at 1:26, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, I have just seen two independent instances where people said that they sent posts to foundation-l in the last +/- 12 hours, which never got posted on the list. The emails do not show up in the moderation queue either (nor are these two subscribers, or the entire list, moderated).
Are there any technical problems with the mail(inglist) server that you are aware of?
Michael
-- Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 2/26/09, Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hard to investigate without knowing details such as time and source address. :)
In most cases, mails are automatically rejected for being sent from an address that is not subscribed. Due to the sheer volume of spam, we don't let those through to the moderation queue.
Eh, I know - I wrote the text of the auto-rejection email for foundation-l ;-)
But in this case we're talking list subscribers... Anyway, I'll follow up if it happens again or I receive more details.
Thanks M.
-- brion vibber (brion @ wikimedia.org)
On Feb 26, 2009, at 1:26, Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, I have just seen two independent instances where people said that they sent posts to foundation-l in the last +/- 12 hours, which never got posted on the list. The emails do not show up in the moderation queue either (nor are these two subscribers, or the entire list, moderated).
Are there any technical problems with the mail(inglist) server that you are aware of?
Michael
-- Michael Bimmler mbimmler@gmail.com
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 2/26/09 9:57 AM, Michael Bimmler wrote:
On 2/26/09, Brion Vibberbrion@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hard to investigate without knowing details such as time and source address. :)
In most cases, mails are automatically rejected for being sent from an address that is not subscribed. Due to the sheer volume of spam, we don't let those through to the moderation queue.
Eh, I know - I wrote the text of the auto-rejection email for foundation-l ;-)
But in this case we're talking list subscribers... Anyway, I'll follow up if it happens again or I receive more details.
Many people have multiple addresses, and sometimes accidentally send from a different address than the one they've subscribed with.
They then email the list moderator asking why their mail didn't come through; when I investigate I usually find that they are subscribed with a different address from the one they're mailing me with, and recommend that they send their email from the other address, at which point their mails get through just fine.
-- brion
On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 7:03 PM, Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 2/26/09 9:57 AM, Michael Bimmler wrote:
On 2/26/09, Brion Vibberbrion@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hard to investigate without knowing details such as time and source address. :)
In most cases, mails are automatically rejected for being sent from an address that is not subscribed. Due to the sheer volume of spam, we don't let those through to the moderation queue.
Eh, I know - I wrote the text of the auto-rejection email for foundation-l ;-)
But in this case we're talking list subscribers... Anyway, I'll follow up if it happens again or I receive more details.
Many people have multiple addresses, and sometimes accidentally send from a different address than the one they've subscribed with.
They then email the list moderator asking why their mail didn't come through; when I investigate I usually find that they are subscribed with a different address from the one they're mailing me with, and recommend that they send their email from the other address, at which point their mails get through just fine.
Perhaps the auto-rejection text message could be edited to add a suggestion to checki this? Most people will not check it anyway, but If this is normal, it seems a good idea.
On 2/26/09 10:30 AM, Tei wrote:
Perhaps the auto-rejection text message could be edited to add a suggestion to checki this? Most people will not check it anyway, but If this is normal, it seems a good idea.
On most lists we discard, not reject, for unsubscribed messages -- sending a mail back to hundreds of spam messages a day results in spamming everybody with bogus bounce messages.
Welcome to the wonderful world of dealing with email administration. :(
-- brion
Spammers should be punished.
skype: node.ue
2009/2/26 Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org:
On 2/26/09 10:30 AM, Tei wrote:
Perhaps the auto-rejection text message could be edited to add a suggestion to checki this? Most people will not check it anyway, but If this is normal, it seems a good idea.
On most lists we discard, not reject, for unsubscribed messages -- sending a mail back to hundreds of spam messages a day results in spamming everybody with bogus bounce messages.
Welcome to the wonderful world of dealing with email administration. :(
-- brion
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org wrote:
Perhaps the auto-rejection text message could be edited to add a suggestion to checki this? Most people will not check it anyway, but If this is normal, it seems a good idea.
On most lists we discard, not reject, for unsubscribed messages -- sending a mail back to hundreds of spam messages a day results in spamming everybody with bogus bounce messages.
Welcome to the wonderful world of dealing with email administration. :(
Yeah, but KDE for example (not to speak of Yahoo! Groups & Co.) does not discard, but reject those messages, and I doubt that they receive fewer or have bigger irons. Is there any data available on how many message are discarded daily?
Rejection is a nice courtesy (well, sort of :-)), as it indicates to the user that the pipeline from his mail client to Wikimedia is working and gives him clear advice what he has to do to post to the mailing list. So I would appreciate changing this configuration as soon as the dumps are rede- signed :-).
Tim
It could be rejected during the SMTP transaction. That would avoid backscatter while giving back meaningful messages.
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 01:26:41PM +0000, Tim Landscheidt wrote:
Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org wrote:
On most lists we discard, not reject, for unsubscribed messages -- sending a mail back to hundreds of spam messages a day results in spamming everybody with bogus bounce messages.
Welcome to the wonderful world of dealing with email administration. :(
Rejection is a nice courtesy (well, sort of :-)), as it indicates to the user that the pipeline from his mail client to Wikimedia is working and gives him clear advice what he has to do to post to the mailing list. So I would appreciate changing this configuration as soon as the dumps are rede- signed :-).
If "reject" from the mailing list means the sender gets a 5xx error during his SMTP session that is trying to deliver the message to "us", then "reject" is the better action.
If "reject" from the mailing list means that the sender's SMTP session succeeds (possibly before the mailing list manager even sees the message) and later a bounce message is sent to the purported sender, then "discard" is the better action for exactly the reason brion states.
If I had to guess, I'd guess the latter case is the situation for this list because I trust the Wikimedia employees know what they're doing.
On 3/28/09 9:10 PM, Brad Jorsch wrote:
If "reject" from the mailing list means the sender gets a 5xx error during his SMTP session that is trying to deliver the message to "us", then "reject" is the better action.
If "reject" from the mailing list means that the sender's SMTP session succeeds (possibly before the mailing list manager even sees the message) and later a bounce message is sent to the purported sender, then "discard" is the better action for exactly the reason brion states.
If I had to guess, I'd guess the latter case is the situation for this list because I trust the Wikimedia employees know what they're doing.
:) Correct.
SMTP delivery succeeds. The message then gets passed into Mailman, who decides "oh I don't really want this" and sends back a "Dear so-and-so you're not allowed to post to this list, here's a copy of the spam message that was sent with your spoofed address" to fill up random peoples' inboxes.
Thus... we turn off rejection to save you spam debris and to save our servers from having to send out the spam debris.
If we could have it only send "sorry" mails on non-spam mails, that probably would be nice. Hopefully some day we can get there. :)
-- brion
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org wrote:
If we could have it only send "sorry" mails on non-spam mails, that probably would be nice. Hopefully some day we can get there. :)
Sending it only to SPF-verified addresses wouldn't be hard, would it?
(I must admit I have no idea how widespread SPF use is.)
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
Sending it only to SPF-verified addresses wouldn't be hard, would it?
(I must admit I have no idea how widespread SPF use is.)
Well, inbox.org doesn't seem to have it enabled, so I guess you'd be out. :)
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
Sending it only to SPF-verified addresses wouldn't be hard, would it?
(I must admit I have no idea how widespread SPF use is.)
Well, inbox.org doesn't seem to have it enabled, so I guess you'd be out. :)
So he would be just as everybody is now.
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+wikilist@gmail.comSimetrical%2Bwikilist@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
Sending it only to SPF-verified addresses wouldn't be hard, would it?
(I must admit I have no idea how widespread SPF use is.)
Well, inbox.org doesn't seem to have it enabled, so I guess you'd be out. :)
Maybe if this feature were implemented, I'd enable it. :)
(Probably not, though.)
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 7:32 PM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org wrote:
If we could have it only send "sorry" mails on non-spam mails, that probably would be nice. Hopefully some day we can get there. :)
Sending it only to SPF-verified addresses wouldn't be hard, would it?
(I must admit I have no idea how widespread SPF use is.)
Google verifies SPF (and, for non-Google-Apps-users also has it so it can be verified), for example. And it's not that difficult to set up an SPF record if you run your own mail server.
Marco
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Platonides Platonides@gmail.com wrote:
Aryeh Gregor wrote:
Well, inbox.org doesn't seem to have it enabled, so I guess you'd be out. :)
So he would be just as everybody is now.
Point . . .
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 1:04 AM, Marco Schuster marco@harddisk.is-a-geek.org wrote:
Google verifies SPF (and, for non-Google-Apps-users also has it so it can be verified), for example.
But it does not *only* accept SPF-validated mail.
Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org wrote some months ago:
If "reject" from the mailing list means the sender gets a 5xx error during his SMTP session that is trying to deliver the message to "us", then "reject" is the better action.
If "reject" from the mailing list means that the sender's SMTP session succeeds (possibly before the mailing list manager even sees the message) and later a bounce message is sent to the purported sender, then "discard" is the better action for exactly the reason brion states.
If I had to guess, I'd guess the latter case is the situation for this list because I trust the Wikimedia employees know what they're doing.
:) Correct.
SMTP delivery succeeds. The message then gets passed into Mailman, who decides "oh I don't really want this" and sends back a "Dear so-and-so you're not allowed to post to this list, here's a copy of the spam message that was sent with your spoofed address" to fill up random peoples' inboxes.
Thus... we turn off rejection to save you spam debris and to save our servers from having to send out the spam debris.
If we could have it only send "sorry" mails on non-spam mails, that probably would be nice. Hopefully some day we can get there. :)
As spam is the current topic of another thread, I'll warm that up once again.
As I had mentioned, e. g. KDE balances spam debris vs. usability in a different way and they survive socially as well as technically.
But, to be more productive: If Wikimedia mailing lists were set up so that mails from non-members would need (si- lent) moderators' approval, I'd volunteer for those queues.
Tim
2009/6/17 Tim Landscheidt tim@tim-landscheidt.de
But, to be more productive: If Wikimedia mailing lists were set up so that mails from non-members would need (si- lent) moderators' approval, I'd volunteer for those queues.
Seconded, I like that idea. The majority of mailing list messages come from members that have been around, and if it's a measure to combat spam then yes, moderation seems a good idea! I have had many a message from a Wikimedia mailing list go to my spam folder when it is perfectly alright, and others that come through into my inbox when they are spam, which is somewhat annoying. I would too volunteer to moderate!
Isabell.
Our mailing lists aren't very wiki-like in that regard. The wiki-way is "the more the merrier" whereas the mailing list way is "the fewer the better". Some of the lists, particularly foundation-l, suffer from a lack of diversity of opinion (too few voices, too much extremely against vs. extremely pro, with the same voices in every situation). I don't know if extra moderators who handle messages from unsubscribed users would help. But anything that would help would be a boon.
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 12:36 AM, Isabell Long isabell121@gmail.com wrote:
2009/6/17 Tim Landscheidt tim@tim-landscheidt.de
But, to be more productive: If Wikimedia mailing lists were set up so that mails from non-members would need (si- lent) moderators' approval, I'd volunteer for those queues.
Seconded, I like that idea. The majority of mailing list messages come from members that have been around, and if it's a measure to combat spam then yes, moderation seems a good idea! I have had many a message from a Wikimedia mailing list go to my spam folder when it is perfectly alright, and others that come through into my inbox when they are spam, which is somewhat annoying. I would too volunteer to moderate!
Isabell.
-- Regards, Isabell Long. isabell121@gmail.com [[User:Isabell121]] on all public Wikimedia projects. OpenPGP Key ID: C395CE07 _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Isabell Long wrote:
2009/6/17 Tim Landscheidt tim@tim-landscheidt.de
But, to be more productive: If Wikimedia mailing lists were set up so that mails from non-members would need (si- lent) moderators' approval, I'd volunteer for those queues.
Seconded, I like that idea. The majority of mailing list messages come from members that have been around, and if it's a measure to combat spam then yes, moderation seems a good idea! I have had many a message from a Wikimedia mailing list go to my spam folder when it is perfectly alright, and others that come through into my inbox when they are spam, which is somewhat annoying. I would too volunteer to moderate!
Isabell.
I'm afraid the queue would be too much flooded by spam. OTOH, the system could send to moderation / send message rejections, to email addresses which it previously know. That is, if you ever subscripted to any of the mailing lists, you won't get classified the same as the random generated addresses. Is this possible on our current software? Should we send a feature request upstream?
Platonides Platonides@gmail.com wrote:
But, to be more productive: If Wikimedia mailing lists were set up so that mails from non-members would need (si- lent) moderators' approval, I'd volunteer for those queues.
Seconded, I like that idea. The majority of mailing list messages come from members that have been around, and if it's a measure to combat spam then yes, moderation seems a good idea! I have had many a message from a Wikimedia mailing list go to my spam folder when it is perfectly alright, and others that come through into my inbox when they are spam, which is somewhat annoying. I would too volunteer to moderate!
I'm afraid the queue would be too much flooded by spam. [...]
Yes, 99,9 % of the queue will be spam. But why be afraid?
Tim
Tim Landscheidt wrote:
But, to be more productive: If Wikimedia mailing lists were set up so that mails from non-members would need (si- lent) moderators' approval, I'd volunteer for those queues.
[snip] Yes, 99,9 % of the queue will be spam. But why be afraid?
Based on existing experience, it creates a huge headache for list moderators, and usually the mod queue just accumulates until it's so long it takes a half hour to load it in your browser so the whole thing gets blown away and the list gets set back to auto-discard... thus moderation of non-subscriber mails is unsuccessful.
-- brion
2009/6/22 Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org:
Based on existing experience, it creates a huge headache for list moderators, and usually the mod queue just accumulates until it's so long it takes a half hour to load it in your browser so the whole thing gets blown away and the list gets set back to auto-discard... thus moderation of non-subscriber mails is unsuccessful.
Some lists are spammier than others. I just cleared the wikimediauk-l queue today, though first I checked the daily status email and there were no human emails in it. OTOH the wikien-l queue was regularly so long as to be painful.
- d.
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org