Send Outages-discussion mailing list submissions to
outages-discussion@outages.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
outages-discussion-requ...@outages.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
outages-discussion-ow...@outages.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Outages-discussion digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Outages lists configuration thoughts (Tim Burke)
2. Re: Outages lists configuration thoughts (Jeff Shultz)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 16:42:46 +0000
From: Tim Burke <t...@mid.net>
To: Outages Discussion <outages-discussion@outages.org>, Justin H.
<justindh...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Outages-discussion] Outages lists configuration thoughts
Message-ID:
<sj0p221mb09799b2be8ded6d2d1a0ea9fbb...@sj0p221mb0979.namp221.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Fair callout, as my employer does the same... which is one of many reasons why
I use a personal mail account for lists.
________________________________
From: Outages-discussion <outages-discussion-boun...@outages.org> on behalf of
Justin H. via Outages-discussion <outages-discussion@outages.org>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2024 10:36 AM
To: Outages Discussion <outages-discussion@outages.org>
Subject: Re: [Outages-discussion] Outages lists configuration thoughts
It's also possible (like my corporate account) that their signature
isn't under their control. It may be added by their outbound mail
exchanger, not their client. This is one of the primary reasons I have
a dedicated account for mailing lists.
Justin H.
Tim Burke via Outages-discussion wrote:
> As a semi-lurker as well, IMHO the hilariously long signatures are
> either caused by someone being too lazy to remove it from their
> response, or what I consider a perceived feeling of over importance...
> if I were bonkers enough to have a 48 line signature, I still wouldn't
> want my entire email signature, including cell phone, direct line,
> direct fax, mailing address, blood type, and mother's maiden name on a
> sesame seed bun to go out to thousands of people... but I don't think
> Mailman has a fix for that. ?
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Outages-discussion <outages-discussion-boun...@outages.org> on
> behalf of Shaun Potts via Outages-discussion
> <outages-discussion@outages.org>
> *Sent:* Friday, February 23, 2024 9:06 AM
> *To:* Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>
> *Cc:* Outages Discussion <outages-discussion@outages.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Outages-discussion] Outages lists configuration thoughts
> Hopefully I'm not out of place here, but I want to just say as a 99%
> lurker and observer that the most obnoxious thing about reading all
> the back and forth here is people sending 5 word emails with 83 lines
> of signature. Can we trim that off or something?
>
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 9:59?AM Josh Luthman via Outages-discussion
> <outages-discussion@outages.org
> <mailto:outages-discussion@outages.org>> wrote:
>
> Myself and others feel like these posts end up generating way more
> noise than just letting it go. I'm not sure why it's so hard to
> just swipe right rather than get frustrated with it. I don't
> think anything outages@ is urgent enough to put it on mute or
> something?
>
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 9:53?AM Andy Ringsmuth via
> Outages-discussion <outages-discussion@outages.org
> <mailto:outages-discussion@outages.org>> wrote:
>
> Good morning all,
>
> Yesterday?s AT&T flub again showed the need for us all to be
> much more deliberate about how we use the outages and
> outages-discussion lists.
>
> I?m not sure off the top of my head who is responsible for the
> overall setup on these lists, or I?d reach out to that
> person/people directly.
>
> Having said that, can we PLEASE consider setting the ?Reply
> To:? default for the outages list to be outages-discussion?
> That is definitely an option within the Mailman list
> configuration.
>
> That would eliminate an insane number of extraneous (and very
> very long) messages for those of us who use the outages list
> as a notification source for immediate attention, which I
> believe to be the intent of that list. I?m looking at one
> message posted to outages yesterday that was a reply to a
> reply to a reply to a reply to a digest message. 513 lines of
> text!
>
>
> Thank you for the consideration.
>
> ----
> Andy Ringsmuth
> 5609 Harding Drive
> Lincoln, NE 68521-5831
> (402) 202-1230
> a...@andyring.com <mailto:a...@andyring.com>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Outages-discussion mailing list
> Outages-discussion@outages.org
> <mailto:Outages-discussion@outages.org>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion
>
> _______________________________________________
> Outages-discussion mailing list
> Outages-discussion@outages.org <mailto:Outages-discussion@outages.org>
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Outages-discussion mailing list
> Outages-discussion@outages.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion
_______________________________________________
Outages-discussion mailing list
Outages-discussion@outages.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages-discussion/attachments/20240223/d5acf3f7/attachment-0001.htm>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 09:25:18 -0800
From: Jeff Shultz <jeffshu...@sctcweb.com>
To: Outages Discussion <outages-discussion@outages.org>
Subject: Re: [Outages-discussion] Outages lists configuration thoughts
Message-ID:
<cagb3bgdrgzec4zgwpi2wnoh0mudxshxjoptwvdd_d-myyjv...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Yep. I just got informed that we've been doing the same for years.... I
rarely ever hit "display images" in emails so I've never seen it before.
Just had an interesting discussion with my boss - might get it removed in
the name of cybersecurity, as it is the sort of thing that could be easily
cloned with phishing/malware links that could be clicked on by our
customers.
Until then, I've been told to live with it - like I have been for most of
the past decade, apparently.
On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 8:43?AM Tim Burke via Outages-discussion <
outages-discussion@outages.org> wrote:
> Fair callout, as my employer does the same... which is one of many reasons
> why I use a personal mail account for lists.
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Outages-discussion <outages-discussion-boun...@outages.org> on
> behalf of Justin H. via Outages-discussion <outages-discussion@outages.org
> >
> *Sent:* Friday, February 23, 2024 10:36 AM
> *To:* Outages Discussion <outages-discussion@outages.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Outages-discussion] Outages lists configuration thoughts
>
> It's also possible (like my corporate account) that their signature
> isn't under their control. It may be added by their outbound mail
> exchanger, not their client. This is one of the primary reasons I have
> a dedicated account for mailing lists.
>
> Justin H.
>
> Tim Burke via Outages-discussion wrote:
> > As a semi-lurker as well, IMHO the hilariously long signatures are
> > either caused by someone being too lazy to remove it from their
> > response, or what I consider a perceived feeling of over importance...
> > if I were bonkers enough to have a 48 line signature, I still wouldn't
> > want my entire email signature, including cell phone, direct line,
> > direct fax, mailing address, blood type, and mother's maiden name on a
> > sesame seed bun to go out to thousands of people... but I don't think
> > Mailman has a fix for that. ?
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > *From:* Outages-discussion <outages-discussion-boun...@outages.org> on
> > behalf of Shaun Potts via Outages-discussion
> > <outages-discussion@outages.org>
> > *Sent:* Friday, February 23, 2024 9:06 AM
> > *To:* Josh Luthman <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>
> > *Cc:* Outages Discussion <outages-discussion@outages.org>
> > *Subject:* Re: [Outages-discussion] Outages lists configuration thoughts
> > Hopefully I'm not out of place here, but I want to just say as a 99%
> > lurker and observer that the most obnoxious thing about reading all
> > the back and forth here is people sending 5 word emails with 83 lines
> > of signature. Can we trim that off or something?
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 9:59?AM Josh Luthman via Outages-discussion
> > <outages-discussion@outages.org
> > <mailto:outages-discussion@outages.org <outages-discussion@outages.org>>>
> wrote:
> >
> > Myself and others feel like these posts end up generating way more
> > noise than just letting it go. I'm not sure why it's so hard to
> > just swipe right rather than get frustrated with it. I don't
> > think anything outages@ is urgent enough to put it on mute or
> > something?
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 9:53?AM Andy Ringsmuth via
> > Outages-discussion <outages-discussion@outages.org
> > <mailto:outages-discussion@outages.org
> <outages-discussion@outages.org>>> wrote:
> >
> > Good morning all,
> >
> > Yesterday?s AT&T flub again showed the need for us all to be
> > much more deliberate about how we use the outages and
> > outages-discussion lists.
> >
> > I?m not sure off the top of my head who is responsible for the
> > overall setup on these lists, or I?d reach out to that
> > person/people directly.
> >
> > Having said that, can we PLEASE consider setting the ?Reply
> > To:? default for the outages list to be outages-discussion?
> > That is definitely an option within the Mailman list
> > configuration.
> >
> > That would eliminate an insane number of extraneous (and very
> > very long) messages for those of us who use the outages list
> > as a notification source for immediate attention, which I
> > believe to be the intent of that list. I?m looking at one
> > message posted to outages yesterday that was a reply to a
> > reply to a reply to a reply to a digest message. 513 lines of
> > text!
> >
> >
> > Thank you for the consideration.
> >
> > ----
> > Andy Ringsmuth
> > 5609 Harding Drive
> > Lincoln, NE 68521-5831
> > (402) 202-1230
> > a...@andyring.com <mailto:a...@andyring.com <a...@andyring.com>>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Outages-discussion mailing list
> > Outages-discussion@outages.org
> > <mailto:Outages-discussion@outages.org
> <Outages-discussion@outages.org>>
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Outages-discussion mailing list
> > Outages-discussion@outages.org <
> mailto:Outages-discussion@outages.org <Outages-discussion@outages.org>>
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Outages-discussion mailing list
> > Outages-discussion@outages.org
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion
>
> _______________________________________________
> Outages-discussion mailing list
> Outages-discussion@outages.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion
> _______________________________________________
> Outages-discussion mailing list
> Outages-discussion@outages.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion
>
--
Jeff Shultz
Central Office Technician
SCTC
(503) 769-2125
Go Big Ask for Gig
--
Like us on Social Media for News, Promotions, and other information!!
??
<https://www.facebook.com/SCTCWEB/>? ? ?
<https://www.instagram.com/sctc_sctc/>? ? ?
<https://www.yelp.com/biz/sctc-stayton-3>? ? ?
<https://www.youtube.com/c/sctcvideos>
_**** This message
contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual
named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate,
distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by
e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail
from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or
error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed,
arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does
not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this
message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. ****_
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages-discussion/attachments/20240223/a41394d2/attachment.htm>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Outages-discussion mailing list
Outages-discussion@outages.org
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/outages-discussion
------------------------------
End of Outages-discussion Digest, Vol 164, Issue 13
***************************************************
