[linux-elitists] Re: CC considered harmful

Teh Entar-Nick nick@teh.entar.net
Mon Feb 23 17:29:50 PST 2004


begin  Ben Finney  quotation:
> On 23-Feb-2004, Don Marti wrote:
> >   max_num_recipients (privacy): Ceiling on acceptable number of
> >   recipients for a posting.
> 
> Doesn't quite sound like the thing.  The objection is to posting to
> the list, and Cc to an address *which is already subscribed to the
> list*.  It's legitimate to Cc an external party, for their info or
> further input, if they're not on the list and it's somehow
> inappropriate to ask them to subscribe.
> 
> Are you proposing that all such cases be canned?  Or that you (as
> list admin) will make that decision in each case?

	Yes.  If you CC on your reply, you obviously don't deserve to
post.  Likewise if you use a proprietary mailer or send a big GIF
attachment.  Don't tell me you're going to whine that Don is being
*elitist* or anything.

> Preferable would be if Mailman could avoid sending a message to
> someone already listed in the recipient headers.  However, even that
> doesn't solve the problem -- you'd receive the copy directly to you
> (which is outside Mailman's control), but not the list copy, which
> is exactly the opposite of the desired result.

	No, that's precisely what happened if some outlook user hit
Reply-To-All to a l-e post before don set max_num_recipients.  It's
the way this list *works*, buddy.  Meet the dress code, and you make
it to the list and are enshrined in the archives.  Fail, and you're
out in the alley whining with the smokers.


-- 
"Forget the damned motor car and build cities for lovers and friends."
	-- Lewis Mumford

end



More information about the linux-elitists mailing list