[Outages-discussion] Outages vs Outages-Discussion

[Jay R. Ashworth]

Jeremy pretty much nails it here.

Those who are concerned about traffic levels because it's routed
to their phone should look into procmail, or its equivalents; it's
possible, I'm pretty sure, to distinguish between original posts
to outages and replies from the header complement, and not forward
replies to one's mobile device, if that's a big thing.

Cheers,
-- jr '</admin>' a

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeremy Chadwick" <jdc at koitsu.org>
> To: outages-discussion at outages.org
> Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2019 10:51:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [Outages-discussion] Outages vs Outages-Discussion

> I certainly do not expect replies to my outages@ posts will end up going
> to outages-discussion at .  This is not intuitive.  No mailing list I've
> used for the past 30 years has behaved that way.  Usenet also did not
> behave that way.  Web forums/threads do not behave that way.
> 
> I often refer coworkers and colleagues to outages@ threads (via the
> Mailman archive web interface) when there are reported problems.  To
> tell people "if you want to read the replies to that issue, you'll need
> to visit a different URL of the OTHER list, which is..." is bizarre.
> Nobody will take such a list seriously.
> 
> In summary, I am against the Reply-To recommendation.  That said:
> 
> I am very much in favour of solving the actual problem, which I believe
> is of a social nature.  We should not be trying to solve bad list
> netiquette via technological hoops.  Instead, I suggest direct action by
> list moderators: lecture those who don't understand proper list
> etiquette, and yank the subs of (and blacklist) repeat offenders.
> 
> Yes, the problem we're discussing will keep happening as new people join
> the list (and don't read list rules or follow proper netiquette), but
> that's life.  More than ever today people need reminded of RFC 1855.  Its
> age doesn't matter; much of its content still applies.
> 
> I think the SNR overall on these lists is tolerable, barring outages of
> "major entities" (ex. Google, FB, etc.).  During such times, I expect
> increased noise, albeit briefly (e.g. for the day).
> 
> --
>| Jeremy Chadwick                                 jdc at koitsu.org |
>| UNIX Systems Administrator                      PGP 0x2A389531 |
>| Making life hard for others since 1977.                        |
> 
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 08:40:32PM -0500, Jim Popovitch wrote:
>> On Wed, 2019-12-11 at 17:42 -0600, Frank Bulk wrote:
>> > The counter-argument to this was made that not everyone who is on
>> > outages in on outages-discussion, and so those posts would fail.
>> 
>> So less "me too!" posts, where's the downside?
>> 
>> -Jim P.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Outages-discussion mailing list
>> Outages-discussion at outages.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion
> _______________________________________________
> Outages-discussion mailing list
> Outages-discussion at outages.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion

-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                  Baylink                       jra at baylink.com
Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates       http://www.bcp38.info          2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA      BCP38: Ask For It By Name!           +1 727 647 1274