[97595] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jo Rhett)
Tue Jun 26 20:18:21 2007
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706261705580.29942@pegasus.billn.net>
Cc: deepak@ai.net, Martin Hannigan <hannigan@gmail.com>,
nanog-futures@nanog.org, nanog@nanog.org
From: Jo Rhett <jrhett@svcolo.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:13:57 -0700
To: Bill Nash <billn@billn.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Jun 26, 2007, at 5:11 PM, Bill Nash wrote:
> Counterpoint, you're suggesting what will ultimately denigrate into an
> assault on mistakes and absent-mindedness, as people with nothing
> better
> to do make periodic examples of people who screw up.
I didn't much care for the original proposal. I never said a single
thing in support of it, so please apologize for putting words in my
mouth.
I disagreed with a number of arguments against it, and those are what
I addressed.
In my opinion the community would be better served by paying someone
to spend half an hour each day (at most) to unsubscribe the people
who spew autoresponder junk.
1. It adds zero off-topic traffic to the list.
2. It forces the person to take action to re-subscribe, so they won't
be able to ignore it.
3. Many may not bother to resubscribe, and their presence won't be
missed.
Very simple, very straightforward, very minimal impact.
--
Jo Rhett
senior geek
Silicon Valley Colocation
Support Phone: 408-400-0550
