On 9/15/2012 17:51, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
On 12-09-15, at 11:34 , "Dennis E. Hamilton" <[email protected]> wrote:
With regard to inappropriate messages to ooo-private, I agree that it is a good
idea to provide better information and to discourage the use of ooo-private for
this kind of traffic. I think one problem is that some folks want their
request to be personal and all think they are (or want to be) reaching a
support organization.
yes.
I conducted an experiment to see how the list rejects messages. The bounce I
received is the message immediately below. The original request to ooo-private
was returned in an attachment. That is attached to this message but I don't
know that it will be preserved on ooo-dev. What that message is like is posted
below the Rejection Message.
Peter can probably speak to this, too, but when I was doing this kind of list
and many others at OOo, I received routinely a lot of posts to webmasters@,
usually by people wanting to communicate with a Turing-competent entity, like
me, or even better. They reached that list/alias via contacts@. No matter what
we wrote on that page, no matter how they were redirected to the Support
page—no matter what, short of Moses and some tablets—they did what I do when
confronted with voicemail and sought humanity in an electron.
So it goes.
Lesson: live with it but try all the same.
Louis
Hi, Louis,
IIRC, I wrote to [email protected], about a glitch on a web page. I got a
polite little reply from a fellow whose name I recognized from the
Council listing. I was just another user, then; I was very impressed. My
point is that these contacts do serve a purpose, at least occasionally.
Hope this makes our hard-working monitors feel better.
/tj/
