Re: Need clarification of "terminal action" in access_rules

That's why the feature (putting two terminal actions together in an 
access rule) is undocumented.  The "consult" and "deny" actions are 
contradictory.

You could forward the messages in a way that allows them to be 
separated.  For example, send them to [email protected] 
and sort them based on the subaddress. 

Even better, you could just use "consult" and have the owner approve or 
disapprove messages that are thought to contain commands.  If the owner 
wants to see the message in any case, wouldn't that be simpler?

Michael

Steven W. Orr wrote:
> Given that forward and deny are both described as terminal in the help, This
> seems to allow the forward to happen and that the deny works after it.
>
> post
> [email protected], deny, replyfile=UnsubFoundInText
> $admin_unsub >= 50
>
> What does not seem to work is to change the forward to a consult, a la
>
> post
> consult, reason="Unsub found in text", deny, replyfile=UnsubFoundInText
> $admin_unsub >= 50
>
> I get no consult from this. Is the doc wrong?
>
>