Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Fri, 20 Aug 1993 21:18:04 GMT |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
In article <[log in to unmask]> writes:
> On Wed, 18 Aug 1993 03:49:07 GMT "Richard W. Wiggins"
<[log in to unmask]>
> said:
>
> >Is there a standard clue that an automated reply tool can key on so as
> >not to generate replies to Listserv-generated mail? Is there a
> >recommended or proposed header that mailing list managers in general
> >ought to send for this purpose? Thanks....
>
> This is the wrong approach. The auto-reply tool should be the one
> identifying its messages as an auto-reply that should be processed
> according to the list owner's wishes (and depending on the type of list
> that may not necessarily be "throw away"). Unfortunately they don't do
> anything like that at the moment.
>
> Eric
I disagree. If I set up a robot reply tool I would never want this tool,
as my agent, posting to mailing lists -- only to individuals who explicitly
send me mail. I belong to a lot of mailing lists, some Listserv, some others,
and I cannot think of a single mailing list that would want me to inform all
the members of my absence for every message someone posts to the list.
Whichever way it might be resolved, it seems for now neither the auto-reply
tools nor the mailing list processors do the job, and as a result we end up
with lots of:
"I'm in Aruba, I'll read this next week"
messages sent to mailing lists.
Forgetting the auto-reply tool question, then it's the case that there is
no suggested header that a user (or a robot) can key on to recognize
that a piece of mail came from a mailing list manager?
/rich
|
|
|