> I thought I was clear about proposing that the IESG or whomever add those
> nasty, evil, not entirely effective, sometimes harmful, anti-standard,
> profane, deprecated, left-coast Precedence: Bulk lines in the hope of
> reducing the plague of vacation noise.
Then write an internet draft and drive it through the IETF processes.
If people like it, they adopt it. So far I don't think that 'Precedence'
is a standard. If you want it to be an IETF standard (and you are sending
to the IETF list), then submit an internet draft.
> Agreed; as Lloyd Wood and Keith Moore have pointed out, if people would
> use vacation programs that didn't respond to Bcc's, then Precedence: bulk
> would be redundant. And yes, vacation programs that reply to bcc's cannot
> be relied upon to get Precedence: bulk right.
Exactly why we have this process. I as a user want ALL of the
senders of email (bcc'd to me and all) being notified of the fact that
I am on vacation. I don't see it as a bug. I might be in the minority or
you might be in the minority. Until there is a proposal - the correct
people will not debate the solution.
> If I've a second proposal, it would be that people who delude themselves
> into thinking that talk every few months in a hotel ballroom or a mailing
> list matters more than what happens in the outer of the world check their
> Microsoft style provincialism--err--inward directedness for holes.
If you don't like the IETF process: (1) try to change it using
the rules, or (2) quit.
> A third proposal is that people not send nearly 4K byte signature blocks
> such as that one to 1000's of people (and 2 copies to me), particularly
> in circumstances where they serve no conceivable good, except perhaps to
> support by example my second proposal. (Since Mr. Royer's preceding
> message did not consist mostly of cryptographic cybercrud, I assume this
> was purely an accident instead of an effort to second my 2nd proposal.)
Perhaps you can write a draft to include user preferences in email.
In that way an MUA will not sent data you don't like. Unless of course
others think of those preferences as cybercrud. :-)
-Doug
S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
