Post by thread:[Admin] Repeat Messages

Is anyone else getting copies of posts to the PICList that were sent last week or maybe a bit before? I keep getting messages with dates that are old, and I even remember reading them. Is this a problem on my end or is this happening to anyone else? Josh Koffman spam_OUTjoshyTakeThisOuTmb.sympatico.ca

<x-flowed>At 03:19 PM 5/14/00 -0500, Josh Koffman wrote: >Is anyone else getting copies of posts to the PICList that were sent >last week or maybe a bit before? I keep getting messages with dates that >are old, and I even remember reading them. Is this a problem on my end >or is this happening to anyone else? > >Josh Koffman >.....joshyKILLspam@spam@mb.sympatico.ca Yep. Here is a portion of one of the offending message's header X-Warning: mitvma.mit.edu: Host smtp.arrakis.es claimed to be ssmtp02.melange.isp dwayne Dwayne Reid <dwaynerKILLspamplanet.eon.net> Trinity Electronics Systems Ltd Edmonton, AB, CANADA (780) 489-3199 voice (780) 487-6397 fax Celebrating 16 years of Engineering Innovation (1984 - 2000) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Do NOT send unsolicited commercial email to this email address. This message neither grants consent to receive unsolicited commercial email nor is intended to solicit commercial email. </x-flowed>

On Sun, 14 May 2000 in "[Admin] Repeat Messages", you wrote: >Is anyone else getting copies of posts to the PICList that were sent >last week or maybe a bit before? I keep getting messages with dates that >are old, and I even remember reading them. Is this a problem on my end >or is this happening to anyone else? > Yes, I'm getting them from a while ago. MY e-mail client sorts mail into time order that it was Sent, not when I recieve it so I get posts all over the place... for example I got this twice... FW: [OT][ADMIN] NO MORE HTML!!! From: "Severson, Rob" Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 11:02:51 -0500 and this [OT] need SX52BD programmer... From: Vasile Surducan Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 10:28:59 +0000 and Re: very [OT] linux masquerading a lan From: Alan B Pearce Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 09:37:15 +0100 and Re: very [OT] linux masquerading a lan From: Mark Willis To: .....PICLISTKILLspam.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 01:24:29 -0700 I thought it was something I had done... Ian. -- A pair of feckin' women's knickers! - Father Jack Uptime at 12:23am up 2:14, 4 users,

> On Sun, 14 May 2000 in "[Admin] Repeat Messages", you wrote: > >Is anyone else getting copies of posts to the PICList that were sent > >last week or maybe a bit before? I keep getting messages with dates that > >are old, and I even remember reading them. Is this a problem on my end > >or is this happening to anyone else? > > > I've been on the list for quite a while now (2 years ish) and this seems to be an almost regular feature. I'm sure Mark dealt with this the last time. Mike

it is a bit disconcerting to realise that a couple of the repeated messages are your own, and know that it is a while since they were sent. Just a possible pointer - it seemed to me that the repeated messages referred to topics where somebody posted a new message - is the archiving software getting screwed up when trying to add a message to a thread causing it to repeat old messages? this may be an invalid pointer as I have not done a proper investigation along this line, but it was an impression I got that is possibly worth investigating.

Nope. Someone's e-mail server's sending incoming posts back to the list somehow, and the entire list then receives the post again. Annoying, isn't it!? I think Mike fixed this one already. Mark Alan B Pearce wrote: > it is a bit disconcerting to realise that a couple of the repeated messages are > your own, and know that it is a while since they were sent. Just a possible > pointer - it seemed to me that the repeated messages referred to topics where > somebody posted a new message - is the archiving software getting screwed up > when trying to add a message to a thread causing it to repeat old messages? > this may be an invalid pointer as I have not done a proper investigation along > this line, but it was an impression I got that is possibly worth investigating.