Dina Dreifuerst wrote:
>
> Consider the ramifications of message looping on law-lib. Since the listowner
> does not read law-lib, there would be a *significant* delay in breaking loops.
>
> Given the various options available, I would much rather just delete a half
> dozen bounced messages for every message I post to the list, than open my
> mailbox and find over 1000 bounces & auto-responses waiting for me!
You make a good point, but there are other options available. My point
is that the list-owner simply may not be aware of them. For example,
the circular bouncing you describe only occurs if the "reply to" is set
to the list and the list does not use a filter to screen out "mail
failure" messages (before the mail is passed to the list subscribers); a
filter at the server level could easily channel those "mail failure"
messages to the list owner and pass all other mail automatically to the
list; even if the list owner only checks in occasionally, this would
assure that the list owner and only the list owner gets a mail box full
of "mail failure" messages. Alternatively, all "reply to" mail could
default to the "list owner" (or subscription) address, and a similar
filter used to pass along all messages except "mail failure" messages.
Several other list servers to which I subscribe use the list owner's
address as the default or use a filter to prevent autoresponder bouncing
from becoming a problem. These include unmoderated and moderated
lists. For that reason I don't think the "continuous loop" kind of
problem is the reason for the default choice here. Obviously, law-lib
has a different intent, and it is probably to facilitate replies (as
some other posters have suggested) to the individual poster rather than
to the list; I simply disagree that the default reply should be to a
"poster" and not the list. I agree that this isn't unreasonable, but I
think the better practice is to default to the list address and to use a
filter to prevent auto-responder's from bouncing a zillion times and to
expect that we all can figure out for ourselves whether we want to reply
to the list or the individual poster.
I also think getting this barrage of "mail failures" dissuades some
posters. I know that I and several others have simply not posted at
times to law-lib because we didn't want to get a stream of mail
failures. Spam and junk e-mail is enough of a problem these days; mail
failure bounces are simply unnecessary with the software solutions that
exist for list servers.
--Gary
**************************************
T. Gary Mitchell
Hill Wallack
202 Carnegie Center Dr.
Princeton, NJ 08543
email: mitchell@ifu.net
voice: 609-734-6320; fax: 609-734-6388
Practice Areas: Litigation, Employment, Information
Technology, Workplace Privacy, Business Torts, Civil Rights,
Banking Regulation, Insurance Coverage, Director/Officer and
Professional Liability, and Internal Corporate Investigations
**************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:49:16 PST