On Sat, 5 Aug 1995 16:06:59 -0400, David W. Baker wrote:
>In article <[log in to unmask]>, "LISTSERV list
>owners' forum" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>    I won't block all DEMON (UK) people because of their provider.  It is
>> not fair to those who can use them properly, even if the provider has an
>> attitude.
>
>   I agree that it is not fair that the practices of one's provider should
>affect what services others allow you access to.
>   However, I cannot afford any further incidents such as those caused by
>Demon's setup. My time is limited, and receiving hundreds of bounced
>messages from one site for 32 days makes my job much more difficult and
>time consuming.
 
In most instances, providers correct problems (usually misconfiguration)
with their mail daemons when the learn about them.  I have zero qualms
about telling any provider that it simply is not practical to provide list
services to nonconforming sites (including those that send "unable to
deliver" messages to the wrong address).
 
So far, on three lists I've not found it necessary to filter an entire
host.  Over the years hosts in the UK have developed something of a
reputation for eccentric behavior, and my response has been to set UK
subscribers to DIGEST or INDEX at the first sign of non-delivery (reducing
the number of silly daemon messages to one a day at least).  In general,
the folks with the most influence over the behavior of host administrators
are the subscribers who are the ones who will be inconvenienced by being
nomail'd, unsub'd, or filtered.
 
I co-own a list on one LISTSERV that hosts a large number of lists.
Several years ago, the LISTSERV maintainer promulgated a policy of
unsubbing ANY subscriber to ANY list whose mail bounced for ANY reason.
Simple, straight-forward, says to the subscriber--once you've got your
problem solved, resubscribe.  The list I co-own on that site has several
hundred subscribers, the other two lists I co-own on other LISTSERVs are
much smaller.  On the whole, I've found that the "hair trigger" unsub for
any non-delivery is MUCH less work for owners and is acceptable to
subscribers (possibly because it's a blanket policy for every list on the
server).
 
/s Murphy A. Sewall <[log in to unmask]> (203) 486-2489 voice
   Professor of Marketing                          (203) 456-7725 fax
   http://mktg.sba.uconn.edu/MKT/Faculty/Sewall.html