Steve Dillen wrote:
> ....I'm really brain dead today...this is my >fourth< attempt to post my
> answer to Eric's question to the list. I'm afraid the difficulty is a
> result of a serious EBKAC (error between keyboard and chair), but here's
> another attempt!
>
>
I don't know the exact nature of your troubles with posting, but as a
general FYI
for all the folks on this list, here's something I recently sent to
another list that
points out some issues with sending mail to the lists.
> There are a number of reasons mail that folks intend to be sent to the
> list don't
>
> make it. You'd be surprised at the number of folks who can't figure out
> that
>
> to send mail to shop-talk@autox.team.net you simply send mail to
>
> shop-talk@autox.team.net. On occasion you see messages that look like
>
> replies to some message, a subject line like:
>
>
>
> Subject: Re: topic1
>
>
>
> In the body of the message, though, absolutely no reference to topic1,
>
> but a new discussion on topic2. What these folks leave out should be
>
> an opening sentence like "I can't figure out how to send a new email
>
> to the list, so I used reply and am too lazy to edit the subject line."
>
>
>
> But for the most part messages sent from a valid subscription address
>
> to the proper posting address and get held back are simply too long.
>
> Gee, I just ranted on about editing replies on another list, a few of
>
> you might remember.
>
>
>
> Basically the default behavior of many mail programs these days is
>
> to include the *entire* original message as part of the text of a reply.
>
> And people don't bother to edit out the unnecessary text. And someone
>
> replies to that reply, and the message gets longer and longer as the
>
> previous posts needlessly cascade on and on.
>
>
>
> Now on the one hand, I like to see the line
>
>
>
> Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
>
>
>
> repeated multiple times in messages, though most folks ignore
>
> that anyway. But there's also a lot of other stuff that gets repeated
>
> that doesn't need to be included. It simply wastes bandwidth [*],
>
> fills up peoples' mailboxes sooner so they removed from the list
>
> for no fault of their own, it makes the archiver work harder both
>
> in indexing the repetitive text to begin with as well as returning
>
> many copies in queries, when one would be sufficient. Think of
>
> it as a computer equivalent of a child repeating "are we there yet?"
>
> over and over and over and over again.
>
>
>
> I won't point out some of the most blatant recent examples, now,
>
> will consider this message as hopefully enlightening a few of you.
>
> I'll go back to my prestigious, highly-paid occupation as Team.Net's
>
> chief byte duster and toilet scrubber.
>
>
>
> mjb.
>
>
>
>
>
> *: bandwidth - for those who don't understand this, think of it
>
> as being like filling a swimming pool. Which will fill it faster,
>
> a fire hose or a garden hose? The "pipe" that the Team.Net bits
>
> travel through is close to the garden hose capacity. People who
>
> don't edit replies are kinking the hose, slowing things down for
>
> everyone.
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
Shop-talk mailing list
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shop-talk
http://www.team.net/archive
|