nanog mailing list archives
Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed
From: Jo Rhett <jrhett () svcolo com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:13:57 -0700
On Jun 26, 2007, at 5:11 PM, Bill Nash wrote:
Counterpoint, you're suggesting what will ultimately denigrate into anassault on mistakes and absent-mindedness, as people with nothing betterto do make periodic examples of people who screw up.
I didn't much care for the original proposal. I never said a single thing in support of it, so please apologize for putting words in my mouth.
I disagreed with a number of arguments against it, and those are what I addressed.
In my opinion the community would be better served by paying someone to spend half an hour each day (at most) to unsubscribe the people who spew autoresponder junk.
1. It adds zero off-topic traffic to the list.2. It forces the person to take action to re-subscribe, so they won't be able to ignore it. 3. Many may not bother to resubscribe, and their presence won't be missed.
Very simple, very straightforward, very minimal impact. -- Jo Rhett senior geek Silicon Valley Colocation Support Phone: 408-400-0550
Current thread:
- Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed Martin Hannigan (Jun 12)
- Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed Bill Nash (Jun 12)
- Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed Martin Hannigan (Jun 12)
- Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed Jo Rhett (Jun 26)
- Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed Deepak Jain (Jun 26)
- Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed Alex Pilosov (Jun 26)
- Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed Jo Rhett (Jun 26)
- Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed Bill Nash (Jun 26)
- Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed Jo Rhett (Jun 26)
- Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed Deepak Jain (Jun 26)
- Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed Bill Nash (Jun 12)