At 3:26 PM -0600 12/8/96, Daniel Norton wrote:
>I could do a lot more about it if I received the full error information.
>This way, I have to turn off error processing so that I get the full
>information, no?  If there's an easier way, I'd like to learn it.
[...]
>I'm fully aware of what happens there and it doesn't change my argument
>one whit.  What LISTSERV does is _hide_ useful information --
>information that it doesn't do anything with and that _I_ need.
 
In this case, yes.  If you've never seen it do better, let me assure you
that the automatic error handling has helped me often by reducing the
clutter of redundant error messages when they are something it can handle.
Even when it can't do anything to stop the errors from happening, I've been
glad that the messages didn't all arrive at my mailbox.
 
Do I wish it handled more of the error message formats?  Of course, but
error message standardization is in progress and will help.
 
Do I wish it did more of the detective work?  Sometimes, but I wouldn't
want it to go overboard and zap a near-match that wasn't the offender.
 
Do I wish it would let me ask for the full text of the last error message
for a particular address?  You bet, but how much storage would it consume?
 
Do I want it to stop altogether?  No, but if you do then you can turn it off.
 
Maybe we need a setting for "after nn errors for the same address that you
can't find in the list, give up on it and send the next error message on to
me intact."  Maybe 'nn' can just be the same as the auto-delete count and
all we need is a switch to turn on the behavior, or leave it on by default
with a switch to turn it off?
 
Mark R. Williamson