[Mailman-Users] An Anonymous, No-reply List

[Mark Sapiro]

Barry Finkel wrote:

>I have a customer who wants a announce-only list.  She does not want
>any replies to the list or to the poster.
>
>In production we are running 2.1.13, and I have 2.1.14 on my test
>machine.  We made the list anonymous
>
>     anonymous_list = yes


Why, Is this needed or is it just an attempt to make replies not go to
the poster?


>and the resulting mail from the list has a header line:
>
>     Reply-To: LISTNAME at nodename
>
>so all replies go back to the list.  I tried
>
>     reply_goes_to_list - Explicit address
>     reply_to_address: user at example.com
>
>and the resulting mail from the list has a header line:
>
>     Reply-To: user at example.com, LISTNAME at nodename


If you set first_strip_reply_to to Yes, the LISTNAME entry should be
removed.


>This results in replies going to both the list and to the explicit
>address.  What I want is either
>
>     a) no "Reply-To:" line in the RFC 5322 mail header (With no
>        sender info nor reply info, I have no idea the address to which
>        an MUA will direct any reply.)


If you set first_strip_reply_to to Yes and reply_goes_to_list to 
Poster, there should be no Reply-To: header in list mail which means
"reply" will be to the From: address which is the poster or the list
in the case of an anonymous list.


>or
>     b) Reply-To: user at example.com
>
>Is this possible?  If not, then we will have to set
>
>     member_moderation_action = Reject
>     member_moderation_notice = Some polite text - This is an outbound
>                                                   list only.



You need to do that anyway because nothing prevents a member from doing
"reply all" or in some other way addressing a message to the list or
to the poster if the list is not anonymous.

See the FAQ at <http://wiki.list.org/x/3YA9>.

-- 
Mark Sapiro <mark at msapiro.net>        The highway is for gamblers,
San Francisco Bay Area, California    better use your sense - B. Dylan