¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

ctrl + shift + ? for shortcuts
© 2025 Groups.io
  1. H390-MTS
  2. Messages
Expanded Topics Messages Polls
Date
Re: Which Hercules version for d7.0?

 

My experience with d6.0 under Hercules is that the system can stay up about two weeks before it will crash. The crash takes the form of a super-dump and is triggered by someone trying to sign into an already existing terminal line task.

?

So, if I sign off of that terminal and try to sign back in to any user, it will cause a super-dump. ??I never leave an instance up more than 10 days without reloading.

?

Sounds like Tom¡¯s fixes were in code released after d6.0. Not sure if the issue he fixed is causing my issues.

On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 08:44 AM, Thomas Valerio wrote:

Douglas Wade wrote:

> Off topic I know, but running MTS under Hercules and getting a week of uptime probably pretty much matches the real mainframe experience. At UBC the maximum uptime was something like 7 days when the system shutdown to clients? for a total (weekly) file save followed by an IPL.

I am commenting on an ancient thread (from last April), I thought I had re-registered for this group when it switched to groups.io but apparently I did not.? I am really only responding to the comment made by Douglas Wade, (and only for historical completeness) but if you want to see the entire thread see the link at the very bottom.

tl;dr: There is no longer any time limit (that I am aware of) on how long MTS/UMMPS can run without experiencing a non-recoverable program interrupt while in supervisor state.? Just to be clear though, this is with regard to weeks and/or months of up time, not years and/or decades.


If I recall correctly, I am pretty sure that at U of M we did not routinely re-ipl after filesave every week, so in the early 1990's when there was somewhat less development work going on, the system would generally stay up for multiple weeks at a time.? There was however a supervisor intertask code bug that would cause a crash approximately 2,147,483,647 (2^31 - 1) milliseconds, or 24.85 days after ipl due to an uncaught fixed point divide overflow in the supervisor intertask module.? This bug obviously also exists in the supervisor that was distributed as part of D6.0. ?

In September of 1993, I made a quick fix to the code and changed the variable that caused the fixed point divide exception from a 32 bit signed integer to a 32 bit *unsigned* integer, which obviously doubled the possible system up time from 24.85 days to 49.71 days.? After MTS was shutdown for general use at U of M, it continued to be run on a couple of Flex-ES systems as well as obviously on Hercules.? With even less of a reason to reboot the system on any kind of regular schedule, in August of 2015 I coded a more permanent fix for the problem (I think, I haven't done any 2042 TOD clock rollover testing (and I doubt anyone else has either)).

So as of now (if the patch is applied) the supervisor should be able to run indefinitely.? There is one remaining bug in MTS related to this though, if a task that is started at IPL, is left unused, if the system is shutdown after it has been up more than 49.71 days, or an attempt is made to use the task, the unused task will snark.? Any freshly started tasks are unaffected.

?? Thomas Valerio
?

?? /g/H390-MTS/topic/which_hercules_version_for/98115982?p=,,,20,0,0,0::recentpostdate/sticky,,,20,2,0,98115982,previd%3D1697596044835478369,nextid%3D1672385293156727066&previd=1697596044835478369&nextid=1672385293156727066
Re: Which Hercules version for d7.0?

 

Douglas Wade wrote:

> Off topic I know, but running MTS under Hercules and getting a week of uptime probably pretty much matches the real mainframe experience. At UBC the maximum uptime was something like 7 days when the system shutdown to clients? for a total (weekly) file save followed by an IPL.

I am commenting on an ancient thread (from last April), I thought I had re-registered for this group when it switched to groups.io but apparently I did not.? I am really only responding to the comment made by Douglas Wade, (and only for historical completeness) but if you want to see the entire thread see the link at the very bottom.

tl;dr: There is no longer any time limit (that I am aware of) on how long MTS/UMMPS can run without experiencing a non-recoverable program interrupt while in supervisor state.? Just to be clear though, this is with regard to weeks and/or months of up time, not years and/or decades.


If I recall correctly, I am pretty sure that at U of M we did not routinely re-ipl after filesave every week, so in the early 1990's when there was somewhat less development work going on, the system would generally stay up for multiple weeks at a time.? There was however a supervisor intertask code bug that would cause a crash approximately 2,147,483,647 (2^31 - 1) milliseconds, or 24.85 days after ipl due to an uncaught fixed point divide overflow in the supervisor intertask module.? This bug obviously also exists in the supervisor that was distributed as part of D6.0. ?

In September of 1993, I made a quick fix to the code and changed the variable that caused the fixed point divide exception from a 32 bit signed integer to a 32 bit *unsigned* integer, which obviously doubled the possible system up time from 24.85 days to 49.71 days.? After MTS was shutdown for general use at U of M, it continued to be run on a couple of Flex-ES systems as well as obviously on Hercules.? With even less of a reason to reboot the system on any kind of regular schedule, in August of 2015 I coded a more permanent fix for the problem (I think, I haven't done any 2042 TOD clock rollover testing (and I doubt anyone else has either)).

So as of now (if the patch is applied) the supervisor should be able to run indefinitely.? There is one remaining bug in MTS related to this though, if a task that is started at IPL, is left unused, if the system is shutdown after it has been up more than 49.71 days, or an attempt is made to use the task, the unused task will snark.? Any freshly started tasks are unaffected.

?? Thomas Valerio
?

?? /g/H390-MTS/topic/which_hercules_version_for/98115982?p=,,,20,0,0,0::recentpostdate/sticky,,,20,2,0,98115982,previd%3D1697596044835478369,nextid%3D1672385293156727066&previd=1697596044835478369&nextid=1672385293156727066
Re: A number of questions about MTS.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Mike
Alexander
Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2024 7:37 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [H390-MTS] A number of questions about MTS.

On 31 Jan 2024, at 12:04, Dave Wade wrote:

One of the other questions was why are there no 2703 or similar lines
defined it the released versions.
I know when you did the release there was little support for these in
Hercules but we now have support for TELE2, 2741 and 3781 (bi-sync for
hasp).
These would be useful for TEK4010 or HPGL plotters, so could some be
added?
Sure, some could be added. However we aren't really anxious to do more
with
D6. I'd rather put my effort into getting the 1996 system out.
Well in that case, could we have them in the 1996 system ?


Mike
Dave
Re: A number of questions about MTS.

 

On 31 Jan 2024, at 12:04, Dave Wade wrote:

One of the other questions was why are there no 2703 or similar lines defined it the released versions. I know when you did the release there was little support for these in Hercules but we now have support for TELE2, 2741 and 3781 (bi-sync for hasp). These would be useful for TEK4010 or HPGL plotters, so could some be added?

Sure, some could be added. However we aren't really anxious to do more with D6. I'd rather put my effort into getting the 1996 system out.

Mike
Re: A number of questions about MTS.

 

Mike,
One of the other questions was why are there no 2703 or similar lines
defined it the released versions.
I know when you did the release there was little support for these in
Hercules but we now have support for TELE2, 2741 and 3781 (bi-sync for
hasp).
These would be useful for TEK4010 or HPGL plotters, so could some be added?
Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Mike
Alexander
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2024 5:49 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [H390-MTS] A number of questions about MTS.


On 26 Jan 2024, at 17:35, Bile Geek wrote:

Speaking of printers: do you recall if later versions of LaTeX[1]
supported PostScript, or if support was stuck on the Xerox 9700?
I don't think I answered this question.

When MTS was shut down in 1996 Postscript support was mostly complete but
not really released yet. However it mostly works.

MTS documentation is generally Textform input, LaTex input, or printer
ready
files meant to be copied to a printer.

There is a new version of Textform in NEW:TEXTFORM that will produce
Postscript output.

DVI files produced by LaTex in MTS can be processed by dvips on a Mac (and
presumably elsewhere). It's also possible to copy the LaText file to a
Mac and
run LaTex on it there. Of course the version of LaTex and TeX in MTS is
30 years
old and somewhat incompatible with current versions.

I have a version of enscript that will turn an MTS printer file, complete
with
carriage control, into a Postscript file. Back around
2010 I used a combination of these techniques to convert much of the MTS
documentation to PDF files. most of which are available online. There is
a lot
more that could be converted.

Mike
Re: A number of questions about MTS.

 

On 26 Jan 2024, at 17:35, Bile Geek wrote:

Speaking of printers: do you recall if later versions of LaTeX[1] supported PostScript, or if support was stuck on the Xerox 9700?

I don't think I answered this question.

When MTS was shut down in 1996 Postscript support was mostly complete but not really released yet. However it mostly works.

MTS documentation is generally Textform input, LaTex input, or printer ready files meant to be copied to a printer.

There is a new version of Textform in NEW:TEXTFORM that will produce Postscript output.

DVI files produced by LaTex in MTS can be processed by dvips on a Mac (and presumably elsewhere). It's also possible to copy the LaText file to a Mac and run LaTex on it there. Of course the version of LaTex and TeX in MTS is 30 years old and somewhat incompatible with current versions.

I have a version of enscript that will turn an MTS printer file, complete with carriage control, into a Postscript file. Back around 2010 I used a combination of these techniques to convert much of the MTS documentation to PDF files. most of which are available online. There is a lot more that could be converted.

Mike
Re: A number of questions about MTS.

 

I have a (very dim) recollection that the 3083 at SFU in 1991 had a whopping 24 MB of memory - but someone else from SFU can correct me if I'm hallucinating again. ;-)

It's fun to run MTS on a modern machine and give it 128 MB of memory (because I can!) and never have to page. Even when I had it on a Raspberry Pi 1. :-)

For serial devices - if someone can generate a system with a 2703, async (and bisync?), would it be possible to get 'physical' async and bisync to work? Or to emulate? I used to have an ITEL/Dura Selectric terminal which would have been fun to watch on MTS again, but even it got consigned to the scrap heap years ago. I do have a couple of old PCs with serial terminal emulators on them, including a multi-window VT100 emulator that I wrote in Turbo Pascal when working on the NIMs.

For bisync, 2780 protocol is trivial, and would be easy to emulate - if it isn't already out there in the form that you want. It would probably take a day to make work. 3780 is a little more complex, but still easy.

2703 provided very basic I/O even to video terminals. You could get graphics on a Tektronix 40xx screen, but there was no full screen editing or such. For the UBCnet-style networking you would need a Node and a NIM (hardware or emulated) to get async full-screen terminal support - but x3270 exists now and works. I had thought of running a Node and a NIM in a PDP11 emulator as a masochistical exercise - just to see if it works- but there would still be work in emulating something like an Auscom channel interface in the PDP11 emulator as well, and a way to interface it to Hercules.

I have been using some crude scripts'n'tricks to get printouts and file transfers on D6.0 using the bare reader/printer/punch devices since MTS was released for Hercules - until 'real' networking is eventually available.

- Richard, VE7CVS

On 1/26/24 9:53 PM, Mike Alexander wrote:
We never had anywhere near 32 MB on an MTS machine.? I think the biggest one might have been 8 MB and we supported up to 300 users on that machine (although it was sometimes a struggle).? Whether you would get paging on a 32 MB machine depends, of course, on what people are doing.? I can bog down the paging system all by myself if I want to.? However a few people doing "normal" things won't put a significant paging load on the machine.

Editing files puts almost no load on the machine.? Compiling them is more intensive, but still not very.? I don't recall that ever being an issue.? If the machine was slow it wasn't due to someone compiling something.

Mike

On 26 Jan 2024, at 21:02, Bile Geek wrote:

I promise this is the last time spamming your / the group's inbox, just
qualifying to the above email:

*how low can MAINSIZE go [without hitting swap constantly, or
even often]

People have obviously run timesharing systems on kilobytes of RAM, just
wondering what's comfortable for later MTS.
Re: Some of you are about to be removed from the group

 

As was mentioned before, the list owner has NO CONTROL over this. Groups.IO is sending out the requests to verify your e-mail address, NOT the list owner of H390-MTS.

Posting a request on this list will do nothing as the list owners have NO CONTROL over this. If you got a verify request message, respond to it.?


On Sun, Jan 28, 2024 at 04:21 PM, Mike Ward wrote:
Same here. Please don't bounce me out.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ken Whitesell
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2024 3:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [H390-MTS] Some of you are about to be removed from the group

There's a fourth type of user, one who _may_ have received a verification email and didn't realize it because it went into a spam folder, and isn't aware that a reply was requested, and does _not_ use gmail, outlook, or yahoo as their email provider. (me)

And so I'm replying here. Please don't bounce me out.

On 1/26/2024 10:49 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
Folks,

I can see we have thee types of users in this group.
One type have received a re-verification message from groups.io and replied, to these I say Thank You.
One type, the ones I am targeting here, have received the message and not replied.
If they continue to ignore this message they will be removed from all their groups by groups.io and their fully qualified domains blacklisted.
They are all personal domains, or personal sub-domains of a larger domain, so the chances are no one else will notice.
This action has been forced by an e-mail from groups.io being received in a honeypot mailbox.
Oh and to the vast majority, who use gmail.com, outlook.com or yahoo.com just go back to sleep. Sorry I woke you.

Dave
Re: Some of you are about to be removed from the group

 

Same here. Please don't bounce me out.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ken Whitesell
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2024 3:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [H390-MTS] Some of you are about to be removed from the group

There's a fourth type of user, one who _may_ have received a verification email and didn't realize it because it went into a spam folder, and isn't aware that a reply was requested, and does _not_ use gmail, outlook, or yahoo as their email provider. (me)

And so I'm replying here. Please don't bounce me out.

On 1/26/2024 10:49 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
Folks,

I can see we have thee types of users in this group.
One type have received a re-verification message from groups.io and replied, to these I say Thank You.
One type, the ones I am targeting here, have received the message and not replied.
If they continue to ignore this message they will be removed from all their groups by groups.io and their fully qualified domains blacklisted.
They are all personal domains, or personal sub-domains of a larger domain, so the chances are no one else will notice.
This action has been forced by an e-mail from groups.io being received in a honeypot mailbox.
Oh and to the vast majority, who use gmail.com, outlook.com or yahoo.com just go back to sleep. Sorry I woke you.

Dave
Re: Some of you are about to be removed from the group

 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Please re-read my message:-

?

  1. The reverification process is being done by groups.io centrally. The owners and managers have no say or control over the process. In fact when it started we didn¡¯t know who was being asked to re-validate. They have now updated the management tools so I can see but cannot do anything. Only the users sent the message can do that.
  2. Most of the users did not get the message. In this group only one is in danger.
  3. This process has been forced by Spamhaus. They have ¡°spam trap¡± mailboxes. If one receives an e-mail it causes the sending server to be blacklisted. Apparently one received an e-mail from a groups.io server so its been blacklisted. More info here:-

?

Dave

?

?

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of CHARLES OHEARN via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2024 1:57 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [H390-MTS] Some of you are about to be removed from the group

?

I do peruse the sites so dont rempve me

?

Charles

?

On Friday, January 26, 2024 at 05:12:20 PM MST, Ken Whitesell <kenwhitesell@...> wrote:

?

?

Thanks for the clarifications, I understand and I appreciate it.

Ken

On 1/26/2024 4:52 PM, Dave Wade wrote:
> Ken (and everyone)
>
> I have no control over the removal of users. If you received the message and do not respond you will be removed. I can do nothing about it.
> I should have added "and many other systems"? to my third line. Most users of major systems, and comcast is such a system, won't be affected.
> There are actually only four people on this list who are in danger. Three are using personal domains, one is using a sub-domain of panix.com
>
> Dave
>
>?
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ken
>> Whitesell
>> Sent: Friday, January 26, 2024 9:43 PM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [H390-MTS] Some of you are about to be removed from the group
>>
>> There's a fourth type of user, one who _may_ have received a verification email
>> and didn't realize it because it went into a spam folder, and isn't aware that a
>> reply was requested, and does _not_ use gmail, outlook, or yahoo as their email
>> provider. (me)
>>
>> And so I'm replying here. Please don't bounce me out.
>>
>> On 1/26/2024 10:49 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>> I can see we have thee types of users in this group.
>>> One type have received a re-verification message from groups.io and replied,
>> to these I say Thank You.
>>> One type, the ones I am targeting here, have received the message and not
>> replied.
>>> If they continue to ignore this message they will be removed from all their
>> groups by groups.io and their fully qualified domains blacklisted.
>>> They are all personal domains, or personal sub-domains of a larger domain, so
>> the chances are no one else will notice.
>>> This action has been forced by an e-mail from groups.io being received in a
>> honeypot mailbox.
>>> Oh and to the vast majority, who use gmail.com, outlook.com or yahoo.com
>> just go back to sleep. Sorry I woke you.
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
Re: Some of you are about to be removed from the group

 

I do peruse the sites so dont rempve me

Charles

On Friday, January 26, 2024 at 05:12:20 PM MST, Ken Whitesell <kenwhitesell@...> wrote:


Thanks for the clarifications, I understand and I appreciate it.

Ken


On 1/26/2024 4:52 PM, Dave Wade wrote:
> Ken (and everyone)
>
> I have no control over the removal of users. If you received the message and do not respond you will be removed. I can do nothing about it.
> I should have added "and many other systems"? to my third line. Most users of major systems, and comcast is such a system, won't be affected.
> There are actually only four people on this list who are in danger. Three are using personal domains, one is using a sub-domain of panix.com
>
> Dave
>
>?
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ken
>> Whitesell
>> Sent: Friday, January 26, 2024 9:43 PM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [H390-MTS] Some of you are about to be removed from the group
>>
>> There's a fourth type of user, one who _may_ have received a verification email
>> and didn't realize it because it went into a spam folder, and isn't aware that a
>> reply was requested, and does _not_ use gmail, outlook, or yahoo as their email
>> provider. (me)
>>
>> And so I'm replying here. Please don't bounce me out.
>>
>> On 1/26/2024 10:49 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>> I can see we have thee types of users in this group.
>>> One type have received a re-verification message from groups.io and replied,
>> to these I say Thank You.
>>> One type, the ones I am targeting here, have received the message and not
>> replied.
>>> If they continue to ignore this message they will be removed from all their
>> groups by groups.io and their fully qualified domains blacklisted.
>>> They are all personal domains, or personal sub-domains of a larger domain, so
>> the chances are no one else will notice.
>>> This action has been forced by an e-mail from groups.io being received in a
>> honeypot mailbox.
>>> Oh and to the vast majority, who use gmail.com, outlook.com or yahoo.com
>> just go back to sleep. Sorry I woke you.
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
Re: A number of questions about MTS.

 

We never had anywhere near 32 MB on an MTS machine. I think the biggest one might have been 8 MB and we supported up to 300 users on that machine (although it was sometimes a struggle). Whether you would get paging on a 32 MB machine depends, of course, on what people are doing.
I can bog down the paging system all by myself if I want to. However a few people doing "normal" things won't put a significant paging load on the machine.

Editing files puts almost no load on the machine. Compiling them is more intensive, but still not very. I don't recall that ever being an issue. If the machine was slow it wasn't due to someone compiling something.

Mike

On 26 Jan 2024, at 21:02, Bile Geek wrote:

I promise this is the last time spamming your / the group's inbox, just qualifying to the above email:

*how low can MAINSIZE go [without hitting swap constantly, or even often]

People have obviously run timesharing systems on kilobytes of RAM, just wondering what's comfortable for later MTS.
Re: A number of questions about MTS.

 

I promise this is the last time spamming your / the group's inbox, just
qualifying to the above email:

*how low can MAINSIZE go [without hitting swap constantly, or
even often]

People have obviously run timesharing systems on kilobytes of RAM, just
wondering what's comfortable for later MTS.
Re: A number of questions about MTS.

 

Dangit, I always come up with one more question after hitting send...

Memory is obviously cheap these days, so I could give Hercules 9gb (and
have!) without breaking a sweat. However, I'm curious about how small I
could go on MAINSIZE (on either D6.0A or the future D7.0) and still
have a usable system.

Obviously memory requirements would be bigger for a system that has
many users doing actual work, but would say 32mb be sufficient for a
handful of hobbyist users? How much memory would be required for
development work on the system itself, editing and recompiling files?
Re: Some of you are about to be removed from the group

 

Thanks for the clarifications, I understand and I appreciate it.

Ken

On 1/26/2024 4:52 PM, Dave Wade wrote:
Ken (and everyone)

I have no control over the removal of users. If you received the message and do not respond you will be removed. I can do nothing about it.
I should have added "and many other systems" to my third line. Most users of major systems, and comcast is such a system, won't be affected.
There are actually only four people on this list who are in danger. Three are using personal domains, one is using a sub-domain of panix.com

Dave


-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ken
Whitesell
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2024 9:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [H390-MTS] Some of you are about to be removed from the group

There's a fourth type of user, one who _may_ have received a verification email
and didn't realize it because it went into a spam folder, and isn't aware that a
reply was requested, and does _not_ use gmail, outlook, or yahoo as their email
provider. (me)

And so I'm replying here. Please don't bounce me out.

On 1/26/2024 10:49 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
Folks,

I can see we have thee types of users in this group.
One type have received a re-verification message from groups.io and replied,
to these I say Thank You.
One type, the ones I am targeting here, have received the message and not
replied.
If they continue to ignore this message they will be removed from all their
groups by groups.io and their fully qualified domains blacklisted.
They are all personal domains, or personal sub-domains of a larger domain, so
the chances are no one else will notice.
This action has been forced by an e-mail from groups.io being received in a
honeypot mailbox.
Oh and to the vast majority, who use gmail.com, outlook.com or yahoo.com
just go back to sleep. Sorry I woke you.
Dave
Re: A number of questions about MTS.

 

You probably could hack together something that would connect a VT100
emulator to MTS, but I don't think anyone has tried this and I'm not
sure how you would do it.
That's exactly what I wanted to do. Oh well; thanks for clarifying!

(...not that it would be the best experience (the UI is definitely
3270-centric, been using x3270 myself), but I just wanted to try it out
for completeness' sake.)



You will note that much of this is written in the future tense. At
the time of D6 the Resource Manager (RM) was not yet integrated into
MTS so none of this is available in D6. The 1996 system has the RM
and it works well. I haven't tried BITNET since there is no one for
me to talk to and configuring it is a pain. I have however gotten a
Postscript printer on my local net to print from MTS using the RM.
Speaking of printers: do you recall if later versions of LaTeX[1]
supported PostScript, or if support was stuck on the Xerox 9700?

[1]



Your description of the history of terminal support in MTS is mostly
correct except that the 2703 wasn't replaced by any of the others, it
coexisted with them until the end.
Ah, that's good news! Less hassle to setup then.



What do you want to use BITNET for? Are there any hosts out there
still using it?
Yes, there's a hobbyist BITNET network called HNET[1][2]. Though making
a local-only network would be cool too.

Would also be interesting to connect the HIM to the TELEBAHN, but
obviously X.25 support has far less priority than TCP/IP.

[1]
[2]
[3]/g/x25
Re: Some of you are about to be removed from the group

 

Ken (and everyone)

I have no control over the removal of users. If you received the message and do not respond you will be removed. I can do nothing about it.
I should have added "and many other systems" to my third line. Most users of major systems, and comcast is such a system, won't be affected.
There are actually only four people on this list who are in danger. Three are using personal domains, one is using a sub-domain of panix.com

Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Ken
Whitesell
Sent: Friday, January 26, 2024 9:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [H390-MTS] Some of you are about to be removed from the group

There's a fourth type of user, one who _may_ have received a verification email
and didn't realize it because it went into a spam folder, and isn't aware that a
reply was requested, and does _not_ use gmail, outlook, or yahoo as their email
provider. (me)

And so I'm replying here. Please don't bounce me out.

On 1/26/2024 10:49 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
Folks,

I can see we have thee types of users in this group.
One type have received a re-verification message from groups.io and replied,
to these I say Thank You.
One type, the ones I am targeting here, have received the message and not
replied.
If they continue to ignore this message they will be removed from all their
groups by groups.io and their fully qualified domains blacklisted.
They are all personal domains, or personal sub-domains of a larger domain, so
the chances are no one else will notice.
This action has been forced by an e-mail from groups.io being received in a
honeypot mailbox.
Oh and to the vast majority, who use gmail.com, outlook.com or yahoo.com
just go back to sleep. Sorry I woke you.

Dave
Re: Some of you are about to be removed from the group

 

There's a fourth type of user, one who _may_ have received a verification email and didn't realize it because it went into a spam folder, and isn't aware that a reply was requested, and does _not_ use gmail, outlook, or yahoo as their email provider. (me)

And so I'm replying here. Please don't bounce me out.

On 1/26/2024 10:49 AM, Dave Wade wrote:
Folks,

I can see we have thee types of users in this group.
One type have received a re-verification message from groups.io and replied, to these I say Thank You.
One type, the ones I am targeting here, have received the message and not replied.
If they continue to ignore this message they will be removed from all their groups by groups.io and their fully qualified domains blacklisted.
They are all personal domains, or personal sub-domains of a larger domain, so the chances are no one else will notice.
This action has been forced by an e-mail from groups.io being received in a honeypot mailbox.
Oh and to the vast majority, who use gmail.com, outlook.com or yahoo.com just go back to sleep. Sorry I woke you.

Dave
Re: Some of you are about to be removed from the group

 

Thanks for the heads up.
Some of you are about to be removed from the group

 

Folks,

I can see we have thee types of users in this group.
One type have received a re-verification message from groups.io and replied, to these I say Thank You.
One type, the ones I am targeting here, have received the message and not replied.
If they continue to ignore this message they will be removed from all their groups by groups.io and their fully qualified domains blacklisted.
They are all personal domains, or personal sub-domains of a larger domain, so the chances are no one else will notice.
This action has been forced by an e-mail from groups.io being received in a honeypot mailbox.
Oh and to the vast majority, who use gmail.com, outlook.com or yahoo.com just go back to sleep. Sorry I woke you.

Dave
61 - 80 of 296