OT: obscene message sizes and idiocy - a solution!

[Fairlight]

On Sun, Mar 12, 2006 at 04:21:45PM -0500, after drawing runes in goat's blood,
J. P. Radley cast forth these immortal, mystical words:
> 
> Right, generic.  Which suits me, under the KISS standard.  :-)

Normally would me as well.  But there are exceptions...

> If some goon needs to send me something bigger in email, I'll comment
> that config line for a couple of hours, then set it back.  No way I'd
> want a permanent exception to my email size limit.  After all, my
> incoming ftp directory is open for larger file transfers.

Both my wife and I have needed permanent exceptions for certain people.
They call these clients, customers, and employers.  Sadly, ftp is unknown
to or feared by a large percentage of people.  One would gladly educate
them, except they don't want to be educated.  They just want the file to
get to you--quickly and expediently for them.  Sadly, the state of KY for
example sends some of their project files in the most attrociously bloated
TIFF format you could want.  24MB worth at once at one point for a single
project.  Maps needed for traffic forecasting.  You never know when
someone's doing to send something like that; have you ever dealt with state
government on -anything-?  "We'll send it when it's available."  That could
be in 10min or 3wks.

Then there are people that simply do it out of convenience.  I have a few
very good friends that have sent me attachments >4MB, and I don't
really have a problem with that, as they know my feelings on the matter
than don't abuse the privelege.  I would hardly call them goons, no matter
how I personally feel about using the technology for this purpose.

A few of them live on this list.

At any rate, I found it less frustrating to create permanent exceptions
than to keep editing (and remembering to re-edit) configs at -any- level of
the process.  My wife even knows procmail, so she can and does handle her
own rules.

mark->