Wow.  Francoise, I think maybe you should have stopped after your first
paragraph.  You do say, "My own opinions, of course", but you're
representing your company every time you send from the LSOFT.COM domain.  Is
this "blame shifting" focus a primary concern at LSOFT?  Is this a fairly
typical representation of the company's standing (I'm assuming you are
referring to LSOFT when you say "US")?  I'm almost embarrassed to be using
an LSOFT product after reading that written tongue-lashing...

Darryl

-----Original Message-----
From: Francoise Becker [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, May 07, 1999 10:25 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [LSTOWN-L] wishlist item


On 5 May 99, at 21:07, Dennis Budd wrote:

>
> No, what she wants is to not have the "review" and "nopost" options to
> be included in the "query" output sent to a subscriber.  Listserv does
> not support that.

And I hope it never does.  If I sent mail to a list and it didn't make it,
and
I tried to figure it out, spent hours trying to track down my "email
problems" only to find out that it was a subscription setting that was
hidden from me, I would be extremely irritated. People should know
where they stand. If someone is such a troublemaker that letting them
know they are on review is apt to get them making more trouble, then
they deserve the DELETE command and the Filter= keyword, not the
REVIEW setting.

Not only that, but it shifts the blame on the innocent software that was
only doing what it was told. Some policy-makers are happy to blame
the computers for enforcing the policies that they haven't the guts to
stand behind. By reporting that the subscriber is on review the software
is defending itself from being unjustly maligned for "losing mail". If
LISTSERV was allowed to take the blame, then there would start to be
rumors about unreliability. Better for YOU to take responsibility for
YOUR actions than for US to get blamed for YOUR actions.

My own opinions, of course.

Francoise