Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 18 Jan 2001 12:02:00 -0500 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
quoted-printable |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Yes, you and I have similar ideas, but somewhat different provocations for thinking so. At least in your case it would seem to take fewer keystrokes/mouseclicks to OK the items instead of how you do it now - click reply, type OK, click send . . . . instead of drag/select/cut/paste - maybe not fewer interactions, but certainly fewer error possibilities.
>>> [log in to unmask] 01/18/01 11:55AM >>>
> Do you mean that the owner's email address/account has been forged and/or
> compromised and that somehow the OK will remedy that?
I don't think so. I think what is meant is that instead of sending the
command itself back to listserv to ADD someone, the owner can just send back
an OK.
I was just thinking this myself, but I'm not sure it would really help all
that much. In my situation, I have a class-full of students all signing up
for the list (a class-oriented list) at the same time. The list is set to
Subscribe By Owner because in the past we have had non-students subscribe to
list (don't ask me why they would want to). This causes 20-30 messages to
come flooding into the owner (me) one at a time.
What I do is cut & past the command from all 30 or so messages from listserv
into a single message. Not terribly efficient, but it does work.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Chris Barnes AOL IM: CNBarnes
[log in to unmask] ICQ: 3581645
Computer Systems Manager
Department of Geography ph: 979-458-1539
Texas A&M University fax: 979-862-4487
|
|
|