[GEN] Re: POLL: Split the List?
I agree with Ben. What's more, if a classification system is adopted and
consistently applied, any rules-enabled mail client will be able to process
messages in a more or less automatic way: download or not, delete from
server, move to folder, etc.
Gerardo E. Brandariz
----- Original Message -----
From: Ben Fosberg <BenFosberg at ATT.NET>
To: <EUPHORIA at LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 7:42 PM
Subject: [GEN] Re: POLL: Split the List?
> I agree with the suggestion of adding "platform specifiers" to the subject
> line, and, in fact made a similar, if less specific, suggestion a couple
of
> months ago. It was roundly ignored by everyone, including myself. The
situation
> has changed somewhat lately, so I'd like to add a few points -
>
> 1) Mark's observation seems correct to me; my experience with other lists
and
> newsgroups is that multiple lists lead to much mis-posting and
cross-posting.
> This requires often that who/whatever manages the list has to move/delete
the
> misdirected msgs and then generate msgs informing the poster as to the
> disposition of the errant msg. The total traffic increases without much
> increase in convenience unless the overall traffic is very high - hundreds
of
> msgs per day.
>
> 2) Much of the mis-posting usually comes from newbies to the "list
cluster" who
> are unaware of the classification scheme - using "platform specifiers" and
> client-side filters eliminates the problem of newbies not getting seen in
the
> appropriate group without intervention from the list manager.If your
filters
> are set to delete or send to subfolders only those msgs containing
> "objectionable" specifiers, you'll still see (most of) the calls for help
from
> the newbies.
>
> 3) OTOH, much of the recent traffic objected to by some is not so much a
> "platform" issue as a "developer details" issue. Several of us are
probably,
> for instance, very interested in [WIN] generally, but not interested in
> reviewing a week's thirty different attempts to fix some problem in the
> RichEdit control of an unreleased version of the IDE. Expanding the list
of
> specifiers to cope with all of the permutations of that situation is
probably
> not going to be feasible. I think if the platform specifiers as suggested
are
> generally followed, we will have to reconcile ourselves to applying NAI
> (Non-Artificial Intelligence) to the problem - i.e. writing clearly
indicative
> subject lines, and manually (excuse my language) deleting the msgs whose
> subjects are of no interest to oneself.
>
> I realize the foregoing does not solve the problem faced by very
sensitive
> souls such as Jiri who seem to be troubled by any reminder whatsoever of
the
> existence of the world's persistent evils - such as Windoz. Furthermore,
it
> would appear that either some of the list members' client software does
not
> have functioning filtering capability, or the members are unaware of it
use.
> But I still think actually splitting the list into separate streams "at
the
> source" will cause a net loss of convenience and functionality for
everyone.
>
> So I'm "voting" against splitting the list up - and in favor of adopting
Ray's
> scheme of subject line "platform IDs" and including it in the Welcome
message
> for new subscribers.
>
>
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
