I haven't used them in over a year. :-) But I really don't get why I still need to get a monthly email from Microsoft telling about this month's updates. Send me one email when I sign up for updates giving me the link to the RSS feed and be done with it. It would make the marker much more permanent than an email too you wouldn't be accidentally deleting it. And that is only WSUS stuff, don't get me started on the Management Packs for SCCM/SCOM/SCE that no one ever tells you about their release, you just stumble upon them by dumb luck. But do they put RSS abilities on those pages??? Noooooo! Makes no sense. TVK
-----Original Message----- From: Michael B. Smith [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 11:53 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Can someone remove me from this list? I'm sure they'll do it as soon as RSS provides mechanisms for ad-supported feeds. Really, why do you think the NNTP-based forums are now deprecated? :-P -----Original Message----- From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 12:49 PM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Can someone remove me from this list? There are a lot of things that should have RSS capabilities. I have been asking Microsoft for quite some time why they don't have RSS abilities for all their various product update pages, but they just keep saying it's a good idea and they will think about it. Anything that consists of regular updates would be much better implements using RSS than most any other update notification means. (Although I do love getting my updates from Susan about Microsoft updates. :-) .) TVK -----Original Message----- From: Sam Cayze [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 11:39 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Can someone remove me from this list? This is exactly why I wish Lyris supported RSS. It's a great way to watch forums/lists. -----Original Message----- From: Tim Vander Kooi [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 11:17 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: RE: Can someone remove me from this list? I can honestly say I haven't missed it once. Although, this doesn't imply that anyone else should leave due to this. I simply looked at the positives of the list vs. the negatives, and for me the negatives won out. At the time I left, there weren't more than 1 or 2 posts per week and they weren't of much use. If that has changed since, I am glad to hear it. TVK -----Original Message----- From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 11:11 AM To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues Subject: Re: Can someone remove me from this list? I think that was a mistake on your part. The Patch Management list is an excellent resource. Just create a rule to trash all the DSRs. -- ME2 On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Tim Vander Kooi <[email protected]> wrote: > I removed my subscription to the Patch Management list for exactly > that reason. It was truly unbearable. When you lose count of the OOO's > upward of > 175 there is just really no excuse for it. > > TVK > > > > From: James Rankin [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 3:27 AM > > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Can someone remove me from this list? > > > > If you've ever sent an email to the Patch Management mailing list, > you'll never complain about the OOO responses from the Exchange or > SysAdmin lists again. > > 2009/3/6 Sherry Abercrombie <[email protected]> > > They've tried to get Lyris to do that, after another one of these > excruciatingly long discussions bashing it for OOO's, and it didn't > work out very well. Leave well enough alone. > > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 7:35 PM, Jason Tierney <[email protected]> > wrote: > > That's just it. It's not just convenience. It's a flaw in some piece > of software - and I'll blame Exchange. When I had my 2003 server, I > had this great regedit that stopped the OOF's. Now on 2007, I have > nothing but 5 year old problems. > > How about this. Can Lyris be configured to drop any messages that > contain Out of Office? Perhaps Exchange can be updated to include an > option to send OOF's only to people in my Contacts folder? > > Either way, I'm an OOFer and don't plan on stopping. There are way to > many private and confidential things in my mailbox to just delegate > access to an underling (no one else can do it). I also have too many > customers that may want to contact me directly that need to know an > alternate contact to send out a blast email to my entire list every > time I call in sick. > > So please, let's agree to disagree and move on. > > Jason Tierney, MCITP:EA > Vice President, Consulting Services > > Corporate Network Services > "Count on Us" > 20010 Fisher Ave, Suite E > Poolesville, MD 20837 > direct: 240-425-4441 | main: 301.948.8077 | fax: 301.349.2518 > http://www.cornetser.com Best Place to Work, Alliance for Workplace > Excellence - 2006, 2007, 2008 > > ...ask me how to better manage your IT costs with PROSuite > ________________________________________ > From: Ben Scott [[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 5:49 PM > > To: MS-Exchange Admin Issues > > Subject: Re: Can someone remove me from this list? > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 2:43 PM, John Hornbuckle > <[email protected]> wrote: >> You don't like getting OOFs from mailing lists. I don't either. But >> based on the number that we get, it appears that quite a few list >> members do things the way I do. > > People are murdered ever day; that doesn't mean it's right. > > (For those bad at logic: I'm not equating sending OOFs to a list with > murder. I'm demonstrating the fallacy of "the frequent occurrence of > something means it is okay to do it".) > >> Does that make it right? It's neither right nor wrong--there is no >> right or wrong solution here. > > I think the arguments about public OOF in general are missing the > point. I'm not about to tell anyone they should or shouldn't use OOF > -- that's their choice, based on their needs. If you need 'em, use > 'em. > > But we were talking about OOF's that get sent to a mailing list like > this one. I can't see any argument in favor of that. To me, that > seems -- objectively -- to be incorrect behavior. The rest of the > list subscribers have no need to know that a general message in a > public forum might not be read by a random person. So it's > inconveniencing many, simply because you object to using a separate > mailbox/address for lists. Do you have a valid reason for that > objection? If there's some overriding reason I might buy it. > Otherwise, you're just putting your own convenience ahead of hundreds > or even thousands of others. > > -- Ben > > ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ > http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja ~ ~ Ninja Email > Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ > http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja ~ > > -- > Sherry Abercrombie > > "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." > Arthur C. Clarke > > > > > > > > ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja ~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja ~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja ~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja ~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja ~ ~ Ninja Email Security with Cloudmark Spam Engine Gets Image Spam ~ ~ http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Ninja ~
