On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 15:05:20 -0500
David W Tamkin <dattier@panix.com> wrote:
> It's not necessarily the author either. It could be the short-sighted
> admin who installed it, assuming that all mail to company addresses is
> personally directed to all addressees and that every message to an
> employee on vacation must get a vacation response every time,
> misconfigured the autoresponding software accordingly even though the
> author's defaults were sensible, and then got some gullible executive
> to order all employees to activate it when they are out of the office.
Right. That's why I escalate to unsubscribing and finally banning the
domain in the case of companies. They members will either successfully
exert clue-training on the admins, or as a group they are a source of
more potential trouble than they are worth.
> Then not only do the employees have no options; they don't know that
> the software has maleficent shortcomings.
Right, that's why you start with a warning.
> That's why I said that JC or any other list administrator should go
> gently on a first-time offender. The autoresponding subscriber may
> have had no choice. If it recurs during another absence, then either
> the subscriber didn't or couldn't do anything about it. In the case
> of "didn't," ban the jerk; in the case of "couldn't," ban the domain
> and notify all subscribers at addresses in it that they're welcome to
> rejoin from different accounts.
Precisely.
> In my list administering days I ran into both situations.
Also.
--
J C Lawrence
---------(*) Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas.
claw@kanga.nu He lived as a devil, eh?
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/ Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.
References:
|
|
