[Outages-discussion] Outages lists configuration thoughts

[virendra rode]

Your suggestion to fix is straightforward, however, I'd like to avoid
active outages discussions from being splintered into outages-
discussion at . I believe this will add further noise and possible
confusion as many who subscribe to outages@ don't necessarily subscribe
to outages-discussion. In the meantime, I am exploring other options.

/vrode 



On Fri, 2024-02-23 at 08:53 -0600, Andy Ringsmuth wrote:
> Good morning all,
> 
> Yesterday’s AT&T flub again showed the need for us all to be much
> more deliberate about how we use the outages and outages-discussion
> lists.
> 
> I’m not sure off the top of my head who is responsible for the
> overall setup on these lists, or I’d reach out to that person/people
> directly.
> 
> Having said that, can we PLEASE consider setting the “Reply To:”
> default for the outages list to be outages-discussion? That is
> definitely an option within the Mailman list configuration.
> 
> That would eliminate an insane number of extraneous (and very very
> long) messages for those of us who use the outages list as a
> notification source for immediate attention, which I believe to be
> the intent of that list. I’m looking at one message posted to outages
> yesterday that was a reply to a reply to a reply to a reply to a
> digest message. 513 lines of text!
> 
> 
> Thank you for the consideration.
> 
> ----
> Andy Ringsmuth
> 5609 Harding Drive
> Lincoln, NE 68521-5831
> (402) 202-1230
> andy at andyring.com