On Thu, 18 Jun 1998 12:24:40 -0500 Andy Finkenstadt
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>How do we account for sf-lovers-request being the one of the first (if
>not THE first) mailing list to use -request as the place to send
>subscription requests?
We account for it like that. I said:
>I'm afraid the first use of -request for the command address dates back
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>to somewhere around 93.
I never said -request did not exist before 93, in fact I said the
opposite in an earlier message. The -request convention dates back to the
70s and, while personally I think it is stupid, it was a well-established
de facto standard when I wrote LISTSERV, so I put my personal feelings
aside and implemented it. And I implemented it in the same manner as the
de facto standard from the 70s, which was to forward to the list
administrator.
The current default implementation in LISTSERV is to return an automatic
response with a list FAQ, and forward on to the list owner. This can be
configured by the list owner to remove the auto-response or remove the
forward, presumably after putting a human contact address in the FAQ.
As far as I know, the first time the -request address was aliased to a
MLM address was around 1993 (it could have been 1992, I did not save the
message in question so I don't have the exact date). The rationale was to
save time for the list owner (NOT the user) by pointing the address to a
computer that would respond for you. There are many situations where this
makes sense, nowadays people are moving in the opposite direction and the
emphasis is on making things easier for the users, at the list owner's
expense if this is what it takes.
People who wish to implement RFC2142 with LISTSERV can simply change the
relevant /etc/aliases entry to:
xyz-request: listserv
I expect that 0.1% to 1% of the LISTSERV installed base will make this
change.
As for new-list et al, virtually all our outsourcing customers announce
their lists using the web subscription form, or in some cases using the
automatic subscribe mailbox (I know this because they typically ask us to
review the instructions for technical correctness, I imagine that
non-outsourcing customers do the same). Once in a very great while, there
is a "send mail to LISTSERV@..." It is becoming more and more frequent
for new clients to express concern that the e-mail nature of the mailing
list is too readily apparent, and that their users will get a bad
impression if they discover that their service is implemented using
obsolete, clunky e-mail technology. So why have a mailing list? Well,
they use HTML mail, which is not mail but "WWW-based push technology."
Many have asked "How do I disable the e-mail interface completely? We
don't want people to be able to send e-mail commands, we want to force
everyone to use the web interface." And a few have actually disabled
e-mail access altogether. This is a trend, not a majority by any means,
at least not yet, but I do think it will soon be impossible to offer a
mailing list without a web interface, and that people will use whatever
access method they are most familiar with. It is just as Chuq said, users
have no religious feelings for technology X or technology Y, what matters
is the data. Some sign off and use exclusively the web interface, some
ignore the web interface altogether, personally I use it whenever it is
more convenient - for searches and for some list management tasks, for
other list management tasks I use the old method because it works better
for me. I know people with the same background as me who do otherwise and
the whole point is that the machine adapts to the users, not the other
way around. While I have strong feelings against disabling the e-mail
interface, I also have semi-strong feelings against refusing to offer a
web interface or whatever new technology may make the most sense. I get
upset on technical grounds when people claim that LISTSERV would work so
much better/faster using a DBMS back end and that it should be rewritten
to work this way and simply require people to buy a DBMS, but there are
cases where this makes a lot of sense so LISTSERV gives you this option,
you can run all your lists this way or just one or none, whatever makes
sense for you. You can even run your service without a single list,
formulating DBMS queries as the need arises to send information to
narrowly targeted audiences. Information technology tools should be
organized like a big smorgasbord where everyone can take his pick based
on technical or cultural background, not "This is the menu and if you
don't like it, you have the right to starve." Remember, what people are
coming back for is the information, not the tools used to retrieve it.
Only a techie would ever think this way, and techies can adapt to
whatever reasonable system people come up with. You need to design for
people who have better things to do than work on a computer all day long.
Eric
