John Kaufmann wrote:
In a message dated 2009.11.13 12:33 -0500, John Kaufmann wrote:
In a message dated 2009.11.12 21:56 -0500, Barbara Duprey wrote:
... we now have a mechanism for looking at an unsub's post and
giving him a command that will result in his getting a digest
of the thread. He can repeat the request as often as he wants,
discarding the old digest because the whole thread will be
captured. And this could even be done from somewhere inside the
thread, if we didn't keep the original post, since it backs up
over the whole thread (* subject to some more investigation).
Opening the attached .ezm file (at least on Thunderbird) yields
a message to which you can reply; the only hitch I see is that
its reply-to is set for the individual, not for the list...
...
...
... After Reply-All to the .ezm, ...just... [delete] the To: header...
On reflection, then, the Barbara Duprey fix for this problem is:
1. As soon as a question is posted from an unsubscribed poster, reply
with a message like this:
You have just posted a question to the mailing list
[email protected]. Because you are not subscribed
to this list, you will not automatically receive replies
to your query. However, you can follow the discussion,
and reply as needed, by sending email requests for the
thread digest to:
users-thread-<Return-Path_number>@openoffice.org
In the digest that you will receive, each post in the
thread will be an attachment with the message number, ending
in the extesion .ezm, so read the messages by
opening the corresponding attachments. If you wish to
reply to any message, hit Reply-All to make your reply
go to the list. Also, as a courtesy, please delete the
address in the "To:" header of your reply.
There'd be something about reading the messages (inline after the
Administrivia, at least with Thunderbird), and opening attached files
only if he wanted to respond. Changing the To to [email protected]
would be another alternative. I don't really have a feeling for how many
times any further communication from the unsub is actually required --
not always, certainly.
[Ideally, we want this automated (topic of a separate discussion).]
2. Hope the unsubscribed user:
a) reads that reply.
b) requests the thread digest.
c) understands to open the attachments.
d) hits Reply-All to reply to a message.
[Without compliance on all of those steps, this method is moot.]
3. Hope the unsubscribed user deletes the "To:" header before replying.
[Without compliance on that, excess mail is generated to an innocent
bystander.]
The instructions need to be clear; then if he doesn't follow them, I
really doubt we have any responsibility to do any more with cc'ing,
forwarding, and the like. I would like to do something about the
structure of that message, if possible -- like having the Administrivia
part replaced by a link to a wiki article (or something like that) to
get all the information. A related thing is cleaning up the
subscribe/unsubscribe messages. Right now, they're inaccurate or
misleading in some ways (syntax of the users-thread command, references
to users-owner who does not actually seem to monitor his mail, if he
even exists, etc.). And I seriously object to all the almost-duplication
going on in a number of different admin messages, it really begs for
trouble and makes for a maintenance nightmare. A single pointer in all
of them, leading to a common explanation, would IMHO be far preferable.
Barbara, is that an accurate summary? If so, perhaps it should be
factored into the off-list discussion between Harold and Paul.
John
Subject to my comments above, yes -- and by all means getting Paul and
that unknown council-person into the loop would be great.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
