On Thu, 18 Jan 1996, Philip Janus (at home) wrote:
 
> At 21:40 01/18/96 -0500, you wrote:
>
> >So, let's make Listserv responsible because we get too many errors and
> >get Eric to write some additional code so Listserv will take care of
> >this kind of bounce for us.  The hundreds of errors I referred to
> >above were as a result of a mailer, a stupid mailer, that an admin set
> >up imporperly.  Well, not really stupid because the system admin knew
> >that with regard to mailing lists, they would just bounce and the
> >listowner or listserv admin would have it in their lap.  Should code be
> >written for listserv to handle this kind of error as well?  I think
> >not.  I vote no.  This is what I did.
> >
>
> "Responsible"? No. Eric is not responsible for these errors, or curing them.
> However, Eric _is_ in a position of responsibility for the marketing of a
> product. He can write some code that users of the product are requesting
> because it will make their jobs easier. This is called customer relations.
 
  Hey, if Eric wants to write code for Listserv that will take care of a
problem that is not his to deal with, that is up to him.  I voted no
because I don't that is where the responsibility is.  If Eric does this
as far as I'm concerned it is not the correct decision because he will
be writing code for every bounce trendy and nothing will change.  Why?
Because the Eric's of the world will do it for them.  More than that
has been done for the sake of a buck called "Customer Relations".
Frankly, I think it would be a waste of his time when more things
could be done for Listserv that *is* his responsibility..and customers
would appreciate the time spent and services provided.
 
> >I sent a complaint to the postmaster the first day.  When I got
> >hundreds again on day 2, I sent the postmaster a note telling them
> >that I was going to filter their mailer's "From:" so mail would be
> >deleted before I saw it.  Now, if their is a problem with our site,
> >the postmaster mails me from a different userid to make sure that I
> >get it.  It did not require new Listserv code. The responsibility is
> >still at the offending site, and I don't care if they don't.  Any
> >complaints from users are referred to their admin.
> >
 
> So it's bad to ask Eric to write some code to solve this problem, but
> blanket deletions of other people's mail is okay?  Isn't that like torching
> a mailbox because you disapprove of US Postal Service policies?
 
  First, I never said it was bad to ask at all....I just question his
judgement if he did it. :-)  Second, a mailer is not a person, and
yes, I agree, the global deletion of a real person's mail is unethical
in my opinion.  I don't think you read my mail carefully.  The e-mail
addr I filtered was a not a person (well, technically it was since it was
also the postmaster's mailbox, but I told them before hand I was going
to do it and they have no problem contacting me with problems from a
different userid).
 
--Trish