[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]
Re: Re: DISC: Signatures (w/Banter)
>I realize now that I shouldn't have use the term "header". What I meant to
>say is the sca-east list server adds a top-line leader to the message (inside
>the message). A typical one is given below:
>-Poster: "Steven Mesnick ('Steffan ap Cennydd')" <email@example.com>
Actually I understood what you meant. But thanks for the correction. It
might have confused others.
>Prior to that, you couldn't tell who was who...and there was a LOT of traffic
>which promoted the change. We probably won't see that here because on
>sca-east nobody was seeing posters--here, some significant fraction do.
You mean no one on sca-east was seeing any information about the originator
of the message? If so, that's a problem with the list 'bot software, not the
front end software each user has. The problems that have cropped up here are
a direct function of what each user has, not majordomo.
>>I, for one.
>(put a mark next to Corun's name.) 8^)
Just put my name on the list like Aelfgar does. I think I've got several
chapters in his book by now. ;-)
>Actually, I would like that...my apologies to Kendrick for any associated
>workload. Of course, expect a lengthy discourse before voting.
If you've ever participated in and RFD (Request For Discussion) prepare for
it to get long and ugly. But then I've seen a few on Usenet about new
newsgroups forming (or not) and I'm pessimistic.
>Introducing the idea in the FAQ seems a little shaky. How many people who
>have been on the list since its inception read the FAQ? Especially, on a
>regular basis? I usually only read those when I sign up.
There could always be changes coming down, and Kendrick did mention that
there were, which should have set off an alarm for you to read it. That's
what FAQ's are for, and especially so when they're posted to the list. You
expect to get one or at least be pointed to it when you sign up on a list,
and if there are no changes you shouldn't have to read it again. But when
it's posted to the list and changes are mentioned, you've no one to blame
but yourself for not reading it.
>Besides, if Kendrick had made a public announcement that he was going to
>make the change prior to implementing it, noone would have raised
>concerns. This is mainly because almost noone here could have foreseen the
Right, no one would have raised concerns because most folks wouldn't have
known beforehand whether they were going to have problems. And I believe *I*
mentioned to him publicly that he should do this. At least I think I wrote
him publicly. Kendrick, do you recall?
>If Kendrick had asked me, I certainly wouldn't have complained--he
>was trying to address other peoples concerns. The questions remain: How
>many persons requested THIS change? And how many persons have complained
>ABOUT this change? I'm sure there are a lot of folks who are neither: they
>didn't have a problem before and they don't have a problem now.
What do you hope to gain from this knowledge? If more people are complaining
than asked for the change you'll want it changed back? At this point the
change has been made and our only recourse is to try other methods of
satisfying people's needs or vote whether to keep the change or go back.
Knowing how many stand here or there isn't going to solve the problem, and
can only cause ill feelings along the way. This discussion has alreay seen
comments ranging from the reasoned, through the impassioned all the way to
the snotty. If it's a vote you want, then call for a period of discussion
(which we're actually already having), upon which we should set a time limit
and then have a vote.
>I'm not sure that's true. I have received that message when I posted to
>the net and someone was crashed. But all I saw was a copy of my
>message--not a copy of everyone's message. The reply-to change will act
>as a multiplier under those circumstances. The multiplication factor is
>the day's mail load. Before, if 20 people posted to the list, 20 people
>got "Message Undeliverable"; now, if 20 people post (on a slow day, that
>is), the entire list gets 20 "Message Undeliverable"--one for each post.
Yes, that's going to happen if someone's mail server goes belly up and
starts getting email from the list address (which it does since the list is
the owner and mail is sent by it). Remember when we were using listserv and
someone's address occasionally became undeliverable? Everyone got all the
email sent back to them via the list. If you send private email, yes, you
only see your mail come back to you. But if the list software sends you
email for you, then it's address is what the server sends mail back to,
causing everyone to see those messages because the list software sends it
out to the list. All mail that goes to firstname.lastname@example.org gets seen by
all of us.
>>And it was frustrating on my end to have to constantly keep asking people
>>to resend email that was meant to go out publicly.
>Yesterday, we saw one case of the opposite--which tends to be
>embarrassing. In my case, I no longer have an option.
But since you and Tibor have pointed out an excellent solution to this
problem, this whole discussion should become moot.
>>Quite frankly, this is a tempest in a teapot.
>Earl Grey, hot, I trust. 8^)
Naw. I prefer Keemun. I like the Chinese black teas over the Indian ones,
and don't care all that much for bergamot. ;-)
I think at this point it's up to Kendrick to see if majordomo can provide
the message leader as it is used by sca-east. I think this will solve most
people's problems (no, we con't do anyting about Trea trying to eat my cat
;-), since most of the complaints have been centered around not knowing who
sent the message rather than having to type in the originator's address in
place of the list address when replying.
Corun MacAnndra | Can not run out of time. There is infinite time. You
Dark Horde by birth | are finite. Zathras is finite. This......is wrong tool.
Moritu by choice | -- Zathras
List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
Admin. requests: email@example.com