[gardeners] FW: BOUNCE gardeners@globalgarden.com: Admin request of type /\bsubscribe\b/i at line 2
Lillian Kepp (gardeners@globalgarden.com)
Sat, 17 Jan 98 18:31:25 PST
Well, it looks like it bounced with "those" words. But still don't
see why Jaime's message bounced.
Needs some checking into.
Lillian
On Sat, 17 Jan 1998 14:28:51 -0800 owner-gardeners@globalgarden.com
wrote:
>>From thekepps@mail.bright.net Sat Jan 17 14:28:47 1998
>Received: from sparticus.bright.net (sparticus.bright.net
[205.212.123.14])
> by webhosts.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA27702
> for <gardeners@globalgarden.com>; Sat, 17 Jan 1998 14:28:46
-0800
>Received: from thekepps.mail.bright.net ([205.212.115.133]) by
sparticus.bright.net (8.8.7/8.8.7/FNG) with SMTP id RAA27725 for
<gardeners@globalgarden.com>; Sat, 17 Jan 1998 17:24:46 -0500 (EST)
>Date: Sat, 17 Jan 98 18:27:27 PST
>From: Lillian Kepp <thekepps@mail.bright.net>
>Subject: Re: [gardeners] BOUNCE
>To: gardeners@globalgarden.com
>X-Mailer: Chameleon V0.05, TCP/IP for Windows, NetManage Inc.
>Message-ID: <Chameleon.980117182906.thekepps@>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=iso-8859-1
>
>I no longer the list owner but I don't know why Jamie's message
>bounced. I am sure that subscribe and unsubscribe have been
removed
>from the filter. I asked that all words be removed from the filter
>so any messages should go through. If this one does you can be
sure
>the two words were removed.
>
>Lillian
>
>On Sat, 17 Jan 1998 15:27:02 -0600 Tom Clothier wrote:
>>
>>From: jaime <jknoble@warwick.net>
>>
>>
>>>George? What in the heck was that? Do you have any idea? I
>>>mean I realize it bounced ... there was an error .... how did
>>>you get it then? Color me confused.
>>
>>As lillian explained it to me, there is a glitch which she is
>trying
>>to correct. Apparently the computer processing mail to this
>>maillist looks for words that it understands, like
>*s*u*b*s*c*r*i*b*e*
>>and if it finds that word, it assumes that the mail was intended
>>for it (the computer), and since your note responding to
>>Margaret's post was full of other words that it did not
>>understand, was obliged to bounce the mail to the listowner.
>>
>>There may be one or two other words that fall into this category
>>as well. It remains to be seen. In the meanwhile, I think it
>>may be useful to refrain from using that word (command) in
>>any context unless you encrypt it as I have done above.
>>
>>tom
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>