Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(August 2003)
 

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

Subject: Re: list policies about vacation programs
From: Nick Simicich <njs @ scifi . squawk . com>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 16:24:19 -0400
To: listmanagers <list-managers @ greatcircle . com>
In-reply-to: <10180 . 1060823249 @ kanga . nu>
References: <Message from "Bernie Cosell" <bernie @ fantasyfarm . com> <3F3A83A6 . 17825 . 290CF2E @ localhost> <3F3A3DAF . 3149 . 17F8505 @ localhost> <3F3A83A6 . 17825 . 290CF2E @ localhost>

At 09:07 PM 2003-08-13 -0400, J C Lawrence wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 18:29:58 -0400
Bernie Cosell <bernie @
fantasyfarm .
com> wrote:

> What about the simple "if it is not addressed specifically to me
> [either in to: or cc:] don't autorespond to it".  I can't recall the
> last time I was on a list that munged the 'to' header to be
> to-the-person instead of to-the-list.

Mailman can do this as a non-default list configuration option.

As can majordomo2. But I can't recall a list (real list, not requested advertising by e-mail) that sends mail like that.

The worst offender in this whole mess is, in my opinion, Lotus Notes. I know of one large company that uses Lotus Notes and which also, in many departments, actually requires that their employees use autoresponders if they will not be able to answer their mail that business day or early the next if sent after 4 PM.

Lotus Notes used to throw away the original header completely, you could not see the received lines (for example) if you were an end user. The new version of the gateway may keep the original RFC822 header as a data field, although I think that is configurable. But in that case, the autoresponder, which is running on the Lotus Notes database box, which is past the gateway, may simply not have the original header. Things like Precedence: are lost, as are the original literal contents of To:, minor fields like Sender, and so forth. You had to make a decision, according to some formula, about what you would put in "From" from the RFC822 header, and there was only one thing that could be migrated to "To:" and that was the internal form of the address. This had to be added (including promoting from the RFC821 header) if it was not there already.

Some of Lotus's e-mail products were far short of competently executed. It was not clear why they were so actively bad, but they were.

In some cases, I was led to believe that the design assumption was that internal mail (from and to an internal destination) was more important than external mail, and thus, the design considered that external mail as an afterthought.

--
He said: "There are people from Baath here reporting everything that
goes on. There are cameras here recording our faces. If the Americans
were to withdraw and everything were to return to the way it was before,
we want to make sure that we survive the massacre that would follow
as Baath go house to house killing anyone who voiced opposition to
Saddam. In public, we always pledge our allegiance to Saddam, but in
our hearts we feel something else."
Nick Simicich - njs @
scifi .
squawk .
com
Follow-Ups:
References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: list policies about vacation programs
From: J C Lawrence <claw @ kanga . nu>
Next: Re: list policies about vacation programs
From: "Mark E. Mallett" <mem @ mv . mv . com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: list policies about vacation programs
From: J C Lawrence <claw @ kanga . nu>
Next: Re: list policies about vacation programs
From: "Mark E. Mallett" <mem @ mv . mv . com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com