On Sat, 3 Aug 2002 11:50:14 -0500 Allie C Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> GL> It seems like it would be better to use a criteria like "bounces > GL> on three separate days" without a reset, rather than on a strict > GL> 15 bounce count. If a mail service was down for a couple of hours > GL> before it got corrected (say it never happens) and during that > GL> time there were more than 15 separate messages (like often happens > GL> in a run on TBUDL)--it seems like that would produce a lot of > GL> false unsubscribes. TBUDL having 20 bounce limit, and 3-days reset instead of 15 bounce/7-days. Day by day I will evaluate if any changes needed I will change it. > Three days is on the excessive side though I do see your point. I'd > more go for 100% bounces over a 24 hour period. But then this could > potentially lead to bandwidth wastage on the part of the list host > having to be receiving 100 bounced over a 24 hour period. It's > therefore really up to Syafril to decide what limits to set. Yeah, bandwidth waste is my concern, any single bounce will reroute to me, Marck and Flash. -- syafril ------- Syafril Hermansyah<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ______________________________________________________ Archives : http://tbtech.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
