[Outages-discussion] Outages lists configuration thoughts
Jay R. Ashworth
jra at baylink.com
Sat Mar 9 11:59:02 EST 2024
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bill Woodcock via Outages-discussion" <outages-discussion at outages.org>
>> On Mar 8, 2024, at 23:46, virendra rode via Outages-discussion
>> <outages-discussion at outages.org> wrote:
>> 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.
>
> That makes sense.
>
> What about a new mailing list, outages-new@ or outages-first@ or something,
> where you can only post about something if you’re the first person to post
> about it, and then it redirects to outages-discussion@? I don’t mean some
> algorithmic mechanism for determining who’s first, I just mean public shaming.
> :-)
>
> Then if people are really picky about not seeing “me too!” posts, they can just
> subscribe to the one new list, and everybody else can enjoy wallowing in all of
> them!
<chuckle>
I'm not terribly fond of that approach either, really; Metcalfe's Law makes
you prefer to have everyone in as few places as possible.
I suppose we might -- if it's technically practical -- have an arrangement
like:
A daemon reposts to outages-notify any message that comes into outages without
"Re:" in its subject line? Or, if the list processor doesn't break the
headers, perhaps any message that doesn't contain an In-Reply-To header; do
email clients still put those in?
That might get us the best of both worlds...
Cheers,
-- jra
--
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
More information about the Outages-discussion
mailing list