Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: MCP MCP@********.com
Subject: Testing Nomail option
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:31:54 -0800
This is just a test to see if the 'nomail' option is working
or not. I currently seem to be getting mail from this list
even if 'nomail' is set, but it is possible that it is just
mail that is slow in arriving.

MCP
Message no. 2
From: MC23 mc23@**********.com
Subject: Testing Nomail option
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 99 14:44:33 -0500
Once upon a time, MCP wrote;

>This is just a test to see if the 'nomail' option is working
>or not. I currently seem to be getting mail from this list
>even if 'nomail' is set, but it is possible that it is just
>mail that is slow in arriving.

works fine for me.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Ancient cultures believed that names held great power, personal names
more so and they were guarded very closely. To protect themselves, they
answered to another name, because if another discovered their real name,
it could be used against them.
History repeats itself.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
I am MC23
Message no. 3
From: MCP MCP@********.com
Subject: Testing Nomail option
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 11:50:21 -0800
> From: MC23 <mc23@**********.com> Friday, January 29, 1999 11:44 AM
>
> Once upon a time, MCP wrote;
>
> >This is just a test to see if the 'nomail' option is working
> >or not. I currently seem to be getting mail from this list
> >even if 'nomail' is set, but it is possible that it is just
> >mail that is slow in arriving.
>
> works fine for me.
>
Well, it doesn't seem to be working for me. I received your
post even with 'nomail' enabled.

Mark,
Could you check to see if I somehow was subscribed twice?
I did get two identical messages saying that I was subscribed.

MCP
Message no. 4
From: Adam J adamj@*********.html.com
Subject: Testing Nomail option
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:06:34 -0700
At 11:50 1/29/99 -0800, MCP wrote:

>Mark,
> Could you check to see if I somehow was subscribed twice?
>I did get two identical messages saying that I was subscribed.

If you can resolve the lists.html.com hostname, you can check this yourself
at http://lists.html.com/mailman/listinfo/shadowrn

-Adam
--
< http://shadowrun.html.com/tss / adamj@*********.html.com >
< ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader / TSA Co-Admin / ICQ# 2350330 >
< FreeRPG & Shadowrun Webring Co-Admin / The Shadowrun Supplemental >
< ShadowFAQ: http://shadowrun.html.com/shadowfaq >
< "I know one thing, it's about damn time I got new entrance music.">
< -Mankind, 01/10/99 RAW is WAR. >
Message no. 5
From: MCP MCP@********.com
Subject: Testing Nomail option
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:02:00 -0800
> From: Adam J <adamj@*********.html.com> Friday, January 29, 1999 12:06
PM
>
> At 11:50 1/29/99 -0800, MCP wrote:
>
> >Mark,
> > Could you check to see if I somehow was subscribed twice?
> >I did get two identical messages saying that I was subscribed.
>
> If you can resolve the lists.html.com hostname, you can check this
yourself
> at http://lists.html.com/mailman/listinfo/shadowrn
>
OK, I just checked again, and I'm only subscribed once, nomail is selected,
and I'm still receiving posts from the list.

MCP
Message no. 6
From: ArcLight arclight@**************.com
Subject: Testing Nomail option
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 22:04:43 +0100
> -----Original Message-----
> From: shadowrn-admin@*****.html.com
> [mailto:shadowrn-admin@*****.html.com]On Behalf Of MCP
> Sent: Friday, January 29, 1999 8:50 PM
> To: shadowrn@*****.html.com
> Subject: Re: Testing Nomail option

<snip>

> Mark,
> Could you check to see if I somehow was subscribed twice?
> I did get two identical messages saying that I was subscribed.

I didn't get a confirmation... At least I get mails :)

ArcLight
ICQ 14322211
NO ONE IS SAFE FROM A MICROWAVE

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Testing Nomail option, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.