Subject:
|
Re: Out-of-office replies, mail header suggestion
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.nntp
|
Date:
|
Sat, 6 Jan 2001 16:16:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
114 times
|
| |
|
|
Frank Buiting wrote:
> Oh well, since we are all dependant of other parties when delivering mail,
> and it's not to be expected that all parties play by the same rules, I'm
> afraid that "bulk" and "list" both have their own problems.
> Like I already mentioned, it's not really a problem to receive an
> 'out-of-office' reply once in a while.
The real problem is mail servers which send the "out-of-office" to the
list, which on some list software which hasn't been fixed to deal with
it generates a cascade of bad messages (when in addition, the mail
server doesn't just send one "out-of-office" to each sender, but sends
one for each message received). To heap insult on injury, some of these
quote the entire message, and when the person is subscribed as digest,
you then get an ever growing digest...
Automated mailing programs are real fun. Some list software attempts to
block things like commands. I maintain a couple lists on such a server,
and then have to deal with bounced messages everytime someone asks for
"help" babysitting, or moving, or whatever. It also makes it a pain to
talk to the list about "help" and "subscribe" (I've learned to just send
such messages with the moderator override in the first place, but still
a pain).
Frank
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Out-of-office replies, mail header suggestion
|
| (...) Yup, you're right: "X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21)" (...) My guess that it should be "bulk" was shaped by other mailing list I have compared the headers from and the info I found (...) (24 years ago, 6-Jan-01, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
