[TriLUG] 9kb message limit on TriLUG mailman server

[Bryan Pearson]

I'm curious how often has the limit actually saved us from ourselves?

Of the posts that needed to be approved how often do you not approve a
post?

Bryan
On Dec 22, 2012 12:08 PM, "Alan Porter" <porter at trilug.org> wrote:

>
>
> > Resending (truncated)... * (Can someone please increase
> > the ridiculously tiny message size limit for this list?)*
>
>
> The 9kB limit was determined a few years ago by looking through a huge
> history of messages posted to our mailing lists.  Basically, Kevin Hunter
> slogged through all sorts of messages, sorting them into "well formatted"
> posts vs "me too" and "quoted too much" and "reply to digest" posts.  The
> cutoff he found from our mail history was 9kB.
>
> That is not to say that we don't allow >9kB posts through... it just means
> that they don't go through immediately.  A mailman moderator needs to nudge
> it through.
>
> Is it a hassle?  Yes, on a very few isolated occasions, it has been.  Some
> people get delayed more than others.  In fact, some of our best list
> participants (Aaron Joyner, for example) are known for posting
> longer-than-average responses, and they tend to get snagged more than
> others.
>
> Is it worth it?  That's up for debate.  Our main mailing list has over 700
> recipients.  I'd rather lean towards early filtering than letting all 700
> readers slog through a series of "reply to digest" or "me too" posts.
>
> Personally, I feel like 9kB is too small, too.  I find that I have to
> approve a lot of posts between 9kB and maybe 15kB.  But since Kevin
> actually did a proper study of our actual list postings from several years,
> I have erred on the side of using his limit.
>
> If we need to change it, I am open to changing it.  And if others want to
> join the moderation list so we get faster responses, I am OK with that, too.
>
> Yesterday, the steering committee (re-)noticed this problem, and we're
> trying to convince mailman that the 9kB limit should apply to the plain
> text portion of email messages, and not to the HTML+plain total size.
>  We're testing that out on another list before subjecting all of you to our
> experiments.
>
> If the group wants to change the current settings, let's discuss it.
>
> Alan Porter
> mailing list janitor
>
>
>
> --
> This message was sent to: bwp.pearson at gmail.com <bwp.pearson at gmail.com>
> To unsubscribe, send a blank message to trilug-leave at trilug.org from that
> address.
> TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
> Unsubscribe or edit options on the web  :
> http://www.trilug.org/mailman/options/trilug/bwp.pearson%40gmail.com
> TriLUG FAQ          :
> http://www.trilug.org/wiki/Frequently_Asked_Questions
>