nanog mailing list archives
Re: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!)
From: Brad Knowles <brad.knowles () skynet be>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 15:08:37 +0200
At 8:50 AM -0400 2002/08/23, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
I've seen it be better, and I've also seen it be a lot worse. But if speeding up the mail delivery time can stop the endless supply of useless replies to things which have already been addressed, I'd suggest it's worth it.
See <http://www.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/lisa98/full_papers/chalup/chalup_html/chalup.html>. Not everyone agrees that instantaneous mail delivery will solve all problems. It might help choke off replies coming back from people who get slow mail delivery, but it's certainly not going to stop people who are slow to *check* their mail, and respond before reading all messages in the thread.
Moreover, it would be likely to encourage chat-like flaming.
And that $300 minimum * 500 people = $150k * 3 = $750k/yr charged at meetings, that doesn't count?
How many of the people on this list actually go to the meetings? How many actually pay the fees? How many people who go to the meetings and pay the fees *don't* watch this list?
Maybe we should have separate lists, with one just for the people who actually pay the fees? Then they can discuss things as much as they want amongst themselves, and not have to worry about all these freebie hangers-on?
Seriously, there is no charge to join the list, and if you want to change that fact, I suspect you're going to drive away most of the people. Some of the people you drive away might not be of particular importance to you, but I can't imagine that you would want to drive away everybody who doesn't pay the $300 fee.
-- Brad Knowles, <brad.knowles () skynet be> "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania. GCS/IT d+(-) s:+(++)>: a C++(+++)$ UMBSHI++++$ P+>++ L+ !E W+++(--) N+ !w--- O- M++ V PS++(+++) PE- Y+(++) PGP>+++ t+(+++) 5++(+++) X++(+++) R+(+++) tv+(+++) b+(++++) DI+(++++) D+(++) G+(++++) e++>++++ h--- r---(+++)* z(+++)
Current thread:
- Die thread, DIE! -> Re: .mil domain root only hosted by one server??, (continued)
- Die thread, DIE! -> Re: .mil domain root only hosted by one server?? Vinny Abello (Aug 21)
- mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 21)
- Re: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Brad Knowles (Aug 21)
- Re: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Chris Adams (Aug 21)
- Re: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Dave Stewart (Aug 21)
- Re: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 21)
- Re: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Brad Knowles (Aug 22)
- Re: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 22)
- Re: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Majdi S. Abbas (Aug 22)
- Re: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Richard A Steenbergen (Aug 23)
- Re: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Brad Knowles (Aug 23)
- RE: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Jim Popovitch (Aug 22)
- RE: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Brad Knowles (Aug 23)
- RE: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Brad Knowles (Aug 23)
- RE: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Jim Popovitch (Aug 23)
- RE: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Brad Knowles (Aug 23)
- Re: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Jeffrey Haas (Aug 26)
- Re[3]: Die thread, DIE!) Richard Welty (Aug 23)
- Re: mail delivery time on nanog-l (was Re: Die thread, DIE!) Brad Knowles (Aug 22)