[sf-lug] Fwd: Question

[Jason Turner]

[Swooping in from out of the lurking darkness...]

I didn't know Mailman had this option.  Sounds perfect -- and so I give 
a thumbs up or +1 to the "opt in/Invite" route.  In terms of personal 
preference, I'll admit that I do not plan to join such a list.  Between 
all the well known job sites and the Bay Area KITlists, I get my fill of 
what's out there.  I do agree though that the changing requirements and 
job functions listed in postings could make interesting fodder for our 
discussions.

--
jt


Rick Moen wrote:

>Quoting jim stockford (jim at well.com):
>
>  
>
>>...create such an alternate list (and maybe approve wholesale copying
>>names from the discussion list (this one) to it).
>>    
>>
>
>If you establish additional lists on (specifically) a Mailman server, you
>_don't need_ to duplicate an existing list's roster -- which is simply
>awful netiquette, by the way.
>
>Instead, after setting up the new list, you use the "invite" function in
>its administrative interface.  E.g., Jim, for _this_ mailing list, it's
>on http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/admin/sf-lug/members/add
>
>Notice the radio buttons:
>
>    Subscribe these users now or invite them?   [ ] Subscribe [ ] Invite
>
>You'll notice that "Subscribe" is default, which is regrettable, because
>it's an open invitation to do The Wrong Thing.  Switching that to
>"Invite" causes an automatic message to be sent out to each address of
>the set you've provided, letting them know they're invited to a mailing
>list, describing it, and allowing them to quick-subscribe through a
>response e-mail, if they wish.
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>sf-lug mailing list
>sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
>http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/sf-lug
>  
>