[Tools-discuss] FW: The [e-mail] list has 2 moderation requests waiting.

["Salz, Rich" <[e-mail]>]

To ask a possibly silly question.  The emails about pending moderation requests (see attached example) have [e-mail] as its From address.  Was that a conscious decision?

Second, a request: the email already has per-WG customization in it that names the specific email address. Could it instead have a direct link to the moderation-pending-requests page?

--- Begin Message ---

The [e-mail] list has 2 moderation requests waiting.  Due to a
misconfiguration in the upgrade from Mailman 2 to Mailman 3, some
administrative messages entered the posting queue, and were held for
moderation.  Advice on recognizing these and how to handle them is
appended below.


Held Messages:
    Sender: [e-mail]
    Subject: Re: [httpapi] Re: Problem Types registry
    Reason: The message is not from a list member

    Sender: [e-mail]
    Subject: Re: [httpapi] Re: Problem Types registry
    Reason: The message is not from a list member


Please attend to this at your earliest convenience.

Mailman 3 changes -----------------

- After upgrading from Mailman 2 to Mailman 3 the list owner and list
  moderator roles attach to the logged-in user, not to a shared
  password.  This means that moderators who need to do certain
  operations, most commonly "mass subscribe", must ask a list owner or
  site administrator to do that.  Or if the list policy permits, a
  list owner may promote a moderator to list owner in order to perform
  those tasks.

Artifacts of the upgrade from Mailman 2
---------------------------------------

- Held messages with *subject* "LIST post from ANY_ADDRESS requires
  approval" *from* "LIST-owner" where the LISTs match are artifacts of
  the misconfiguration, and may be deleted on sight.

- Held messages with *subject* "LIST post from ANY_ADDRESS requires
  approval" *from* "ANOTHER_LIST-owner" are very likely to be genuine.
  Apply normal moderation practice.

- Held messages with a *subject* "LIST post from ADDRESS requires
  approval" where ADDRESS contains the word "confirm" and a long
  random token are likely to be genuine.  However, you *should not*
  approve them, because that will send them to the list.  Instead, you
  should notify the new member to retry the verification, and if that
  fails due to timeout to restart the subscription process.

If you cannot resolve an issue, please consult the IETF Secretariat
<[e-mail]>.

--- End Message ---