Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(February 1997)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: fresh horror from AOL
From: Eric Thomas <ERIC @ VM . SE . LSOFT . COM>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 02:07:07 +0100
To: List Managers <list-managers @ GreatCircle . COM>
In-reply-to: Message of Sun, 2 Feb 1997 17:11:22 -0800 from Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui @ plaidworks . com>

On    Sun,   2    Feb   1997    17:11:22   -0800    Chuq   Von    Rospach
<chuqui @
 plaidworks .
 com> said:

>Are you sure  you aren't letting your personal  attitude towards digests
>color how you think your users view them?

But I have not commented on whether or not my users like digests! Since I
always offer digests,  and since I was  speaking about lists I  run in my
spare time, I just don't think it's  relevant; they can have it their way
whether I use them myself or not  on this or that particular list, and if
they don't like  the defaults I chose  they can go start  their own list.
What I said is that users who are getting digests give me more trouble as
a whole, even though they're a minority, because answering questions from
human beings about why they didn't get this or that digest takes me a lot
more time than  auto-processing bounces. Digests are  also dangerous with
newbies. It doesn't matter how many times  you tell them not to quote the
whole digest  when replying,  they'll do  it anyway.  You'll add  code to
detect this and reject the posting, but it doesn't matter because they'll
find  a new  MUA that  mangles  the quoted  message  in such  a way  (for
instance a uuencoded "attachment" or  maybe rewriting the header in X.400
or proprietary format)  that they'll manage to quote it  anyway. And even
if you succeed (or add a posting  size limit so they *really* can't quote
the whole thing back),  they'll write to ask how come  they can't post to
the list,  and you'll have to  explain that the reply  function isn't the
only way to  post to a list,  after which they'll ask you  which menu you
are talking about and helpfully indicate that they are using a Gateway in
case it makes any difference. In  a professional environment this may all
be fine and well, but when I run a  list in my spare time I don't want to
do user support. I do enough of this  at work, thank you very much :-) So
they get the regular subscription option  that doesn't confuse them and I
have my  bounces auto-processed and  keep being  a happy camper.  I'm not
saying this  is Better,  I'm saying  it saves  me time.  Maybe if  I were
running my lists on 1991 hardware or if I had to read every single bounce
myself at 2400bps  I would set things up differently,  but that's another
story. Obviously this also depends on  who your audience is and what mail
software they use.

  Eric

Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Stale horror from AOL
From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn @ idyllmtn . com>
Next: Is Bob Metcalfe right or wrong?
From: garyb @ outlawnet . com (Gary Bickford)
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: fresh horror from AOL
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui @ plaidworks . com>
Next: RE: fresh horror from AOL
From: "Dr. Manion" <CEO @ Citadel . Net>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com