Banner/Link exchange proposal (fwd)

[Jeremiah Johnson]

Bugtraq, NANOG, and all the other lists I'm subscribed to (excluding this
one and AKLUG) a total of 8, the Reply To: header points to the list.

I do not have limited experience.  You have limited understanding of
typical list behavior.

bye

-Jeremiah Johnson
psg.com/~jjohnson

On Wed, 22 Dec 1999 corliss at alaskapm.org wrote:

>On Wed, 22 Dec 1999, Roxanne Reid-Bennett wrote:
>
>> corliss at alaskapm.org wrote:
>> [...]
>> > Now, what is everyone's preference?  Do a simple reply to this message to send
>> > me a private vote. . .
>> 
>> Arthur, under almost any condition I'd vote for a "reply" to go to the
>> author, and the writer would have to work to have the reply go to (just)
>> the list.  However, with the list as "dead" as it currently is, changing
>> the default behavior, at least for a period of time, may actually
>> encourage discussion that wouldn't take place any other way.. If for no
>> other reason than people saying "oops".
>
>:-)  I'll put you down as vote for Jeremiah's preference, then.  So far,
>though, I have two votes for the current configuration, and two for
>Jeremiah's, both counts including both myself and Jeremiah.  Talk about voter
>apathy.  ;-)
>
>Until I hear from more list users, I won't be changing anything.  As a matter
>of personal policy, no amount of public squawking is going to make me take
>action without a good rationale and some general consensus.  I don't
>particularly like how this issue was broached to begin with, and I think I've
>been very tolerant in my handling of it to date.
>
>> Jeremiah Johnson wrote:
>> > I don't want to have to do extra work to get this list to behave like
>> > every other list on the planet.
>> 
>> I'll disagree with you on this one, in general.  The net standard (at
>> least the last time I read it) highly recommends that "reply" go to the
>> author *as the standard*.  There are all sorts of reasons for that
>> behavior, most of them apply to higher-volume lists.  [and considering
>> that for a period of about a year I was running over a dozen mail lists
>> generating between 100-750 messages a day to several thousand
>> subscribers, I paid close attention to what kind of traffic was going to
>> the lists, and what the configuration brought to the table for the
>> readers and the managers.]
>
>Something that I considered bringing up, but didn't think it worth the
>trouble.  But, since you did, I'll echo that.  I think Jeremiah's experience
>with lists is very limited.  An overwhelming percentage of lists that I've
>used operate in just the way we are.
>
>> However, different people have different preferences.  This group is
>> small enough and the list traffic is light enough that the other
>> configuration (reply going to the list) won't degrade the quality of the
>> content on the list <g>.
>
>Agreed with the statement, but, again, I want to hear what all the users have
>to say before taking action simply because of the way this subject was
>initiated.  There's a lot to be said about respect and ettiquette that must be
>maintained in a public forum, something that was a bit lacking as of late.
>
>	--Arthur Corliss
>	  Perl Monger/Alaska Perl Mongers
>	  http://www.alaskapm.org/
>
>=================================================
>Mailing list info:  If at any time you wish to (un|re)subscribe to
>the list send the request to majordomo at hfb.pm.org.  All requests
>should be in the body, and look like such
>                  subscribe anchorage-pm-list
>                  unsubscribe anchorage-pm-list
>

=================================================
Mailing list info:  If at any time you wish to (un|re)subscribe to
the list send the request to majordomo at hfb.pm.org.  All requests
should be in the body, and look like such
                  subscribe anchorage-pm-list
                  unsubscribe anchorage-pm-list