> Well no.. I think it would be nearly impossible. I'm not the world's
> brightest, but just how would a listserv determine what was appropriate to
> truncate and what would not be appropriate? From a programmatical point
of
> view I can not think how I would code that... perhaps you could shed some
> light?
This message WAS three times as long, as it contained a reasonable
explanation of how this would work, and why it was good - but I just sorta
realized maybe I was on the wrong track.
It occurs to me that instead of truncating messages, maybe it would be
better if every block of x lines (or more) was deleted from the digest. That
way, all comments would make it, and we'd still snip large blocks of quoted
text from the digest.
There's a teeny bit of a readability problem, if you have to think for a
second about the context of some comments, but trust me - you cut 20k of
gibberish from every digest, you won't make many enemies.
How do you like that?
Gary Mauer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Host/Moderator of the Window Cleaning Network
- Your People, Product and Information Site -
http://www.window-cleaning-net.com/
Email Groups - 900 Networking Links
8 Bulletin Board and 21 Trade Show Links
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 10, 1999 4:40 PM
Subject: Re: [IMail Forum] (FYI) Updated Listserv Improvements Request
> > Nope. A private list allows ALL subscribers to post, or only the
> moderator.
> > (All or nothing). I'd like to see an option to allow only authorized
> > subscribers to post, because it opens up a lot of new ways to use lists.
> The
> > thing is, if you only want your experts, board members, or advertisers,
> etc.
> > to post, you have to take unusual measures, such as managing passwords
for
> > them, or adding all unauthorized subscribers to your kill file.
>
> Ahh okay, yes now that you mentioned it that wasn't on my list, but I have
> spoken with Robert about it previously. I think you and I spoke about it
a
> few weeks back also. When I spoke with Robert about it though we spoke of
> this capability being really good for online "Board-Room" lists where
> members of a project could subscribe and watch what's going on, but only
the
> board members would be able to post. Somehow I neglected to add that on
to
> the list. I'll make sure it gets added on tonight though.
>
> >
> > The list in my example HAS to be private, because that's the only way I
> can
> > get them on the killfile at the same time the get on the user file. -
But
> > the option should be available whether the list is public or private. I
> can
> > think of uses in either case.
> >
> > > Well that is certainly a good point, but in my suggestion I
specifically
> > > asked for people in the kill list not to receive notification that
they
> > were
> > > there.
> >
> > That's why I said "if" - in case you didn't get your notification.
> Actually,
> > I'd like to see it renamed anyway. I know it's called that because it
does
> > "kill" messages, but the name causes people problems. Even if they don't
> see
> > it the name, I have to discuss it the killfile with these guys, and I'd
> > rather be calling is something else.
>
>
> Personally I like Kill file.. it sounds so ominous and makes me appear as
if
> I have more power than I otherwise woudl :)
>
>
> > > > - Truncate digest messages. When you read individual messages in
> > > continuing
> > > > threads, you often don't realize how much quoted material there is,
> down
> > > > below - but in a digest, it's just awful reading. Plus it makes the
> > digest
> > > > several times larger than it has to be. I'd like to be able to set
my
> > > digest
> > > > to truncate any message at, say the 10th line starting with a ">"
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes I agree, but I think this would be nearly impossible to implement.
> > Many
> > > people (such as me) add replies in the middle of other's posts.
> >
> > Maybe you mean to say you can't see yourself using it - that's not the
> same
> > as saying it's nearly impossible for technical reasons.
>
> Well no.. I think it would be nearly impossible. I'm not the world's
> brightest, but just how would a listserv determine what was appropriate to
> truncate and what woudl not be appropriate? From a programmatical point
of
> view I can not think how I would code that... perhaps you could shed some
> light?
>
>
> >
> > If it's possible, I'd really love that option, because I get complaints
> > about trash in the digest.
> > But I can see where many would not want to use it, particularly if
> > paragraphs were running long on a particular list - for whatever reason.
> >
> > But over here, the people posting messages are not the ones reading the
> > digest, for the most part, and I don't think they'd mind if a few of
their
> > comments didn't make it into the digest.
>
>
> Ohh you mean just truncate.. as in absoluetly no posting over a few K in
> size? Wow... I guess but I would never use it.. not sure that's a real
good
> idea, but if I understand you correctly now, truncating a message beyond a
> particular size would be doable easily.
>
> >
> > As an admin, if I thought 10 lines was cutting it too tight, (I'm
already
> > thinking that) I could increase the number, or turn off the option. I
just
> > think it's a choice you should be able to make, to weigh readability
> against
> > the possibility that some material would be missing.
> >
> > And if auto truncation couldn't be offered, I'd at least like to be able
> to
> > edit messages that are in the digest mailbox.
> >
> > Lastly, thanks for working with them on listserver improvements. I'm
sure
> it
> > helps them to have users sum up what they want - so they don't have to
> guess
> > what people want.
> >
>
>
> Well I know that Robert is probably tired of hearing from me about now..
> I've been hounding him since last November for listserv upgrades. In June
> he agreed to "see what he could do" and I know has been working on some
but
> they're "not far enough along to show anyone" yet. I keep pestering him
> every so many days (5-7) to see if ther is any progress... I'm kind of
> desperate for some improvments. With a lot of lists, and bigs ones at
that
> the weak administrative control over the listserv is really hampering me.
>
> Anthony
>
> Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
> to be removed from this list.
>
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
