Barbara Duprey wrote:
Harold Fuchs wrote:
Barbara Duprey wrote:
Harold Fuchs wrote:
Barbara Duprey wrote:
Harold Fuchs wrote:
2009/11/1 Barbara Duprey <[email protected]>
Just a thought -- there is a link that can be provided into the
archives
for a particular thread. What if either (in order of preference)
the list
manager, a moderator, or anybody on the list who knows how, sent
a message
to the unsubscribed poster containing that link? The poster
would not have
to subscribe (thereby getting what could potentially be a
dismaying number
of messages -- and often leading to a "please unsubscribe me"
message). Yet
they'd be able to follow the discussion, wouldn't they, to see
any responses
on the thread?
I *think* that the main source of the problem is that the
moderator's e-mail
program and/or his/her installation of the list management
software is
mis-configured.
The list management software is called "ezmlm" ("Easy Mail List
Management"
or some such). The ezmlm manual is on-line at
<http://www.ezmlm.org/manual/>.
Section 1.6 discusses replying to a message from an ezmlm mailing
list (see
http://www.ezmlm.org/manual/Replying.html#Replying>). It suggests
quite
clearly that a "Reply all" should go to the list *and* to the
unsubscribed
originator of the message.
Perhaps the moderator has overriden the default "reply to"
address in the
ezmlm config file(s) and/or in his/her own e-mail program ????
In the immortal words of Sandy Powell: can you hear me, mother?
The Reply-To header is forced to the list only. Whether that could
be changed or not, it's been discussed here many times and nothing
has ever happened -- I don't think mother hears us! I'm also not
sure how good we'd be at remembering to use Reply All, or whether
it would carry throughout the discussion. If somebody just used
Reply, and then somebody deeper in the thread actually answers the
OP's question, we'd be back where we are now, right? I almost
never use Reply All myself, I'm pretty sure I'd sometimes forget!
From what Paul (a? the? moderator for this list) has said on-list,
the moderators really don't have any say in what the ezmlm setup
is, and I think the approval process is outside of the normal
e-mail client use. The responsible person or group, and the list
owner, remain mysterious (at least as far as I've seen here). One
of the reasons I'm exploring the archive link is that it could be
accomplished as part of the list management protocol, or by the
moderator, or by people like us -- depending on who we could get
to listen.
I agree that it's not 100% but if mother would listen it might be a
simpler solution to implement. Any "reply" or "reply all" directly
to the unsubscribed poster ("UP") at least gets to that poster. I
agree that a "reply" deeper in the thread might get lost as far as
the UP is concerned but perhaps that's less important. The
difficulty, if it is one, is that a simple "reply" to the UP does
not get noticed by the list so it might look as if the question
hasn't been answered. This might lead to multiple responses but
IMHO that's erring on the right side.
It sounds to me (please correct this if I'm wrong) that
implementing the "active link" requires work in the ezmlm (list
management) area which would have to be done by the same moderator
as the one who would need to change the "reply to" configuration.
Or have you got a cunning plan that implements the "active link"
without touching the moderator's system?
Cedrtainly not a cunning plan! If we could get to ezmlm config
folks, they could certainly implement the Reply-To change, and
possibly the archive link (though that's not ceertain; depends on
when what is done, I think). I don't think the moderators have any
influence over the Reply-To (they are not involved in ezmlm config,
from what Paul has said, and they don't exactly Forward messages; I
don't think their e-mail clients play a role in the approval), but
if they were willing, they could certainly send a message to the OP
with the archive link. Finally, absent any cooperation at all from
ezmlm or moderators, we as individuals could provide such a response
to the OP when a new thread has been started, and thus give the OP
access to the whole thread regardless of how anybody else replies.
Barbara,
If we assume no help from ezmlm/moderators, how do you propose to
provide the link? It seems to me to be an extremely awkward procedure
but perhaps you have a shortcut I haven't visualised.
So far, the only way I know is to go to the archive and do a search
(probably just recent posts); when you select a message, you get the
link. Not slick, and I'd love it if there were a better way, but as it
is we spend a lot of energy on cc'ing, talking about cc'ing, talking
about talking..... Even this would, I think, significantly reduce the
amount of total effort required. And if we could just stop the
automatic advice to "subscribe so you can see replies" we'd probably
have fewer of our perennial "unsubscribe me" posts.
I'm tempted to just give it a try!
I'm certainly not going to gainsay that. I just think it's weird that so
many people seem to find it so hard or so demeaning to cc: a UP. Yes,
one can forget. But not often. And I also don't understand why the odd
"Forwarding to unsubscribed OP." should have caused so much offence.
Nowt so queer as folk.
Should we send the link *only* to the UP or should we send it to the UP
*and* the list so that the UP doesn't get multiple copies? Of course the
latter won't deter some people who don't seem to read threads and
therefore send the same solution as others have already sent :-( Or are
we expected to check the thread first to see if the UP has been sent the
link so that, if s/he has, we don't send another copy?
--
Harold Fuchs
London, England
Please reply *only* to [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
