|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed
[please note - followups are set to nanog-futures, this doesn't belong to nanog-list. respect the reply-to header and reply to nanog-futures ] On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Deepak Jain wrote: > However, a tremendous amount of time is wasted just by discussing these > sorts of "small" problems. Plenty of people contribute to nanog daily > and don't feel the need to complain about it. It seems to me, the ones > who contribute in spurts sometimes separated by months seem to have to > less to complain about. a) Talking often is not a measure of contribution to community. b) If we tolerate the annoying bounce emails, it doesn't mean we shouldn't fix the issue. > That said, a very simple way to handle it is to separate your mail > (whether its procmail, a separate mailbox, a + rule in your name, or > what have you) to automatically catch these "horrible" autoresponders > into a box that doesn't clutter your critical mail. I think that's how > most of us do it. > > I think someone suggests the above everytime a discussion comes up. In > the spirit of "a very simple solution", everyone can be their own > dictator of their own mailbox -- they don't need to protect the rest of > the list, or develop a consensus for change. Just fix it for yourself. > This is a time-honored NANOG tradition, at least when it comes to email. In the sense that a time-honored network engineering tradition is "let others figure out how to deal with my broken routers/email clients/etc", maybe. But I don't think its a good tradition to keep ;) -alex
|