We're checking - Mike's afraid that LSoft hard-coded the message,
sadly.  I'll be writing a note to L-Soft suggesting some mods!

  Mark

James Newton wrote:
> We did kill it, and emailed Dave to tell him why. Yesterday, he said he had
> it fixed and resubscribed. It isn't fixed so he has been dumped again and
> told why.
>
> Paul, your suggested replacement for the listserver message looks ok, but
> I'd like to tone the sarcasm down a bit, and discus it with the other list
> admins first.
>
> ---
> James Newton (PICList Admin #3)
> mailto:jamesnewton@piclist.com 1-619-652-0593
> PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com or .org
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pic microcontroller discussion list
> [mailto:PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU]On Behalf Of Paul B. Webster VK2BZC
> Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 07:19
> To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
> Subject: Re: [ADMIN] Rejected post
>
> Alan B Pearce wrote:
>
> > It would seem that the rejected posts are all echoes from someone who
> > has had their access to the list cut off by their employer.
>
> > >Apparently-To: dave@DIGILOG.CO.UK
> > >Delivered-To: e7df6e19-dave@DIGILOG.CO.UK
>
>   You're dead right about the mechanism.  Not so much about their list
> access, it's generally their e-mail account in toto.
>
>   It was reported to the admins a couple of days ago - not sure why they
> haven't killed it yet except to say they're busy guys and some of these
> things are due to strange mail reflections which are difficult to track.
>
>   I'm not sure for example whether the listserver puts unique IDs on to
> each copy of each message it resends or how easy it is to match these
> logs again if they cause a bounce.
>
>   The important thing is that until the bogus message the listserver
> returns to the original sender is fixed, which I am assured it will be
> :) soon, that senders do *NOT* re-send any messages.
> --
>   Cheers,
>         Paul B.

--
I re-ship for small US & overseas businesses, world-wide.
(For private individuals at cost; ask.)