At 10:11 PM -0700 6/23/98, Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:
> - you must have lucked out in not having users on braindead corporate mail
> servers that send bounces and errors to the Reply-To address
> - more important, you must have had a miracle. How does forcing users to
> reply to the list "prevent duplicates"?
No, he's a small list. coercing reply-to on small lists works pretty
well, actually, and can make things a little easier for users. And it
generally works fine, because small lists don't have as much trouble
with malfunctioning mail servers and bogus vacation bots and whatever.
Problem is, it doesn't scale up well. and once you set it, it's very
hard to change it without major fights. But as long as you stay small,
and it doesn't cause problems, great. (just don't grow...)
> Yes, it keeps the people
> involved in a discussion from getting extra copies because of neglecting
> to trim the headers... but that's a pesty inconvenience.
I've actually studied this. the added volume is well under 1% of a
typical user's mail, and only affects them if they're active posters.
it's just that the few users really sensitive to this duplicated e-mail
also tend to be rather vocal -- but it's not statistically significant,
and for most users I've surveyed on it (we're talking 90%, not 51%),
not even really noticable, much less a bother. the few users who try to
make it an issue ought to worry about building a client tool to take
care of their mail for themselves, IMHO...
(just goes to show, there are no absolutes in this stuff. A lot of
running a list right is understanding the issues and making the right
judgement calls. And god knows, I've made enough mistakes over the
years to know....)
--
Chuq Von Rospach (Hockey fan? <http://www.plaidworks.com/hockey/>)
Apple Mail List Gnome (mailto:chuq@apple.com)
Plaidworks Consulting (mailto:chuqui@plaidworks.com)
<http://www.plaidworks.com/> + <http://www.lists.apple.com/>
Follow-Ups:
References:
|
|
