On 13-jul-2007, at 15:17, Keith Moore wrote:
However, I think the IETF benefits from policies whose effect is
to keep the clueless and inconsiderate off our mailing list
until they can be educated.
Problem is, such a policy wouldn't be educating the clueless system or
network administrator or mail service provider who implemented the
broken autoresponder; it would merely be penalizing his customer. Few
of us operate our own mail systems any more.
One of the problems with autoresponders is that the person who uses
them
is the last one to know how well they work.
These are all highly important considerations, except for one thing:
if the offenders aren't unsubscribed, posters still receive their
messages, even if the list doesn't.
If the end result is that people who are burdened by such
autoresponders either
1. stop using them, or
2. temporarily unsubscribe during their absense
that's completely fine with me. Just suffering the bad behavior
because we feel bad for the users of these systems doesn't help anyone.
Earlier today I was still getting mail on behalf of jburguet@xxxxxxx
despite my best efforts instructing my many layers of spam detection
and mail filtering to reject these messages, by the way.
Just unsubscribe the people who do this, trying to optimize the
situation beyond this is a complete waste of time. And fighting a
waste of time by wasting more time pretty much defeats the purpose.
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf