From: "Pete Weiss" <[log in to unmask]>

> Anyone besides Trish ;-) remember this?
>
>
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind9806&L=LSTOWN-L&P=R7890&I=-3

Thanks, Pete--and Trish, if you're still on this list, too. I hadn't read
it; I was using Majordomo then (and yes, I am happier now).

I think there is much to be said for Trish's view (and much of it well said,
by Trish). However, I also think there is a point at which technical
solutions are needed.

Trish may or may not have come to appreciate size limits since then, but I
had used them for at least a decade before switching to LISTSERV, and they
are a great deal better than giving everyone on a discussion list the option
of crippling email for a lot of other subscribers with no notice. (We limit
to 100KB, and I occasionally wind up taking apart a bounced email and
explaining to the contributor just where their mindless
fat-file-generator-software padded 20K of text to get it over the limit. But
it beats having two or three 1.5MB emails coming through the list each day!)

On the other hand, building deletion requests for the bottom banner into the
banner itself seems to provide all the enforcement I need. Anyone who
bothers to read to the bottom will simply get irritated with the poster who
left extra banners attached; peer pressure should take care of the rest.

But I have only 800-odd subscribers and usually no more than 10 posts a day,
which puts my biggest list well down the scale compared to some mentioned
earlier in this discussion. The more problems can be handled by tech
solutions, the more time the list owner has for the ones that can't, and the
number of problems that arise for any given list is probably proportional to
the product of the subscriber count and posting rate.

The need for tech solutions might also be driven by context. We have an
issue with posts bearing notices claiming the contents are proprietary or
confidential; we are an international committee developing communications
standards, and statements like that raise legal concerns. Therefore, in
addition to the policy of ignoring any input that comes in with such a
restriction attached, I have filters bouncing them back, and add new filters
whenever one gets through. For many other communities, that wouldn't be
worth the trouble.

Each list is a separate community with individual needs and requirements,
and no single approach fits all. The more lists plagued by any given
problem, the more reason to offer technical means of addressing it.

Trish's concern about tech solutions becoming a crutch for inadequately
prepared list owners is legitimate, but as new features have come along and
I have tried to provide my lists the best environment possible, I have found
the need to develop some technical sophistication in any case. Very little
of this can be done well without considerable understanding and careful
thought.

Hal Keen