subject:"Re\: Q\: List Policy"

Chris Bannister wrote:
 Quite right, but why discourage CCing on an open list? I can see the
 point in not CCing on a closed list.

For the same reasons.  Whether the list is open or closed is irrelevant to
the harm that CCing people unbidden causes.  A list being open or closed is
also irrelevant to the fact that it is incumbent on the sender to ensure they
receive replies, capable of finding replies or requesting copies if they
cannot fulfill the previous two trivial tasks.

-- 
 Steve C. Lamb | But who can decide what they dream
   PGP Key: 1FC01004   |  and dream I do
---+-



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-22 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh

On Sat, 22 Nov 2008, Steve Lamb wrote:
 Chris Bannister wrote:
  Quite right, but why discourage CCing on an open list? I can see the
  point in not CCing on a closed list.
 
 For the same reasons.  Whether the list is open or closed is irrelevant to
 the harm that CCing people unbidden causes.  A list being open or closed is
 also irrelevant to the fact that it is incumbent on the sender to ensure they
 receive replies, capable of finding replies or requesting copies if they
 cannot fulfill the previous two trivial tasks.

Actually, to be very blunt: CCing people is absolutely the only way to deal
with massive ammounts of email and very-high-traffic lists when you *care*
about not ignoring email that you should have read.

If you want an example of a CC policy radically different from Debian's,
take a look at the development mailinglists for the Linux kernel and all
related projects.  There, the policy is that you are to *always* CC everyone
that should (or might even remotely need to) get an email, in addition to
sending it to the lists.  Otherwise, the chances that such an email will be
lost in the ocean of stuff, or never reach the right people.

IMO the truth behind the CC policy in Debian lists is that it is the policy
not to do so for a LONG time now, and a lot of people is bothered by CCs, so
they resist any such changes (note: I am NOT judging whether they're right
or wrong for doing that, if one could even classify such an issue in that
way).  IMO, the reason many people are bothered by the CCs is that the
typical DM, DD and Debian user just plain don't *care* about stuff from
debian-user/-policy/-private/* bothering him all the time.  He'd rather
ignore it completely until he decides to read that ML folder, if ever.

Which is why we *DO* CC people directly every time it is clearly their
problem/fault/responsibility.  We have entire systems to make sure people
can ask automated tools to add them to such cc's, even.  But that
certainly doesn't cover untargeted ML posts and replies to them.

In the end, it boils down to the fact that most people have lame mail
filtering setups that cannot sort delivery mailboxes in the right priority
and do proper destination-based duplicate supression (so that you can get
automated if it is also destined to a Debian ML, file into the ML folder,
and have any further duplicates supressed), and are not in any hurry to
deploy one.

-- 
  One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

On Saturday 22 November 2008 04:15:42 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
 Actually, to be very blunt: CCing people is absolutely the only way to deal
 with massive ammounts of email and very-high-traffic lists when you *care*
 about not ignoring email that you should have read.

That is absolute, 100% pure rubbish.  This is solvable by technical means, 
right now, today, if email client authors would just implement a feature that 
has been standard for decades in forums that far outstrip the volume of 
mailing lists, newsgroups.  The feature?  Scoring.

Even now if you post on a high volume mailing lists there is absolutely no 
excuse to miss a message that is posted to it if you're really interested.  

FilteronReferences or in-reply-to!  Here are the relevant headers 
from your message:

References: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Since, at least in KMail, I can set any prefix in my MSGID I put a static 
string there then filter on an In-Reply-To that starts with that string and 
ends with @dmiyu.org, highlight it, filter it into a different folder, 
whatever.  I don't miss mail and I don't require a harmful, blanket policy 
that annoys many people and wastes resources.

 If you want an example of a CC policy radically different from Debian's,
 take a look at the development mailinglists for the Linux kernel and all
 related projects.  There, the policy is that you are to *always* CC
 everyone that should (or might even remotely need to) get an email, in
 addition to sending it to the lists.  Otherwise, the chances that such an
 email will be lost in the ocean of stuff, or never reach the right people.

To be blunt, if those people can't figure out how to filter on In-Reply-To 
they have no business hacking the kernel.

 IMO the truth behind the CC policy in Debian lists is that it is the policy
 not to do so for a LONG time now, and a lot of people is bothered by CCs,
 so they resist any such changes (note: I am NOT judging whether they're
 right or wrong for doing that, if one could even classify such an issue in
 that way). 

Sorry, but it is a sane method of doing so.  Quite frankly if I put inject 
something into a conversation and it later turns a different direction that 
doesn't interest me I can simply stop reading those messages.  Or, to put it 
another way, you can unsubscribe from a list.  You can't unsubscribe from a CC 
list.

 IMO, the reason many people are bothered by the CCs is that the
 typical DM, DD and Debian user just plain don't *care* about stuff from
 debian-user/-policy/-private/* bothering him all the time.  He'd rather
 ignore it completely until he decides to read that ML folder, if ever.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong on that.

 In the end, it boils down to the fact that most people have lame mail
 filtering setups that cannot sort delivery mailboxes in the right priority
 and do proper destination-based duplicate supression (so that you can get
 automated if it is also destined to a Debian ML, file into the ML folder,
 and have any further duplicates supressed), and are not in any hurry to
 deploy one.

Uh-huh.  If that's the case then why CC?  Sorry, there is absolutely 0 
cases where CCing when unrequested is appropriate.  Your volume argument is 
complete rubbish.  Forcing people to filter because of other people's 
inconvenient poor habits is akin to the harm done by C-R.  Finally, don't 
think I don't get the cute idea of you CCing me this message.  I am not 
amused, don't do it again.  I have never ask for a CC from this list and never 
will.  To CC me against the list's CoC clearly shows you're more interesting 
in trolling than contributing anything meaningful to the conversation. 

-- 
 Steve C. Lamb | But who can decide what they dream
   PGP Key: 1FC01004   |  and dream I do
---+-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-22 Thread Eduardo M KALINOWSKI

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
 If you want an example of a CC policy radically different from Debian's,
 take a look at the development mailinglists for the Linux kernel and all
 related projects.  There, the policy is that you are to *always* CC everyone
 that should (or might even remotely need to) get an email, in addition to
 sending it to the lists.  Otherwise, the chances that such an email will be
 lost in the ocean of stuff, or never reach the right people.

I always though one subscribed to mailling lists exactly to be able to
get all emails easily, and to let the list software do all the work,
instead of having people use Reply all to create a manual pseudo-list.


-- 
Once harm has been done, even a fool understands it.
-- Homer

Eduardo M KALINOWSKI
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://move.to/hpkb


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy


On 11/22/08 02:02, Andrei Popescu wrote:

On Fri,21.Nov.08, 17:59:30, Ron Johnson wrote:

On 11/21/08 14:23, Don Armstrong wrote:
[snip]

Because people who are subscribed to the list don't require extra
copies of mails. [And since anyone who wants a copy can request it
using MFT: or manually, it's perfectly fine.]

MFT?


Mail-Followup-To: (or did you mean something else with your question?)


Nope,  Thanks.

--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy


On 11/22/08 06:15, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
[snip]


Actually, to be very blunt: CCing people is absolutely the only way to deal
with massive ammounts of email and very-high-traffic lists when you *care*
about not ignoring email that you should have read.

If you want an example of a CC policy radically different from Debian's,
take a look at the development mailinglists for the Linux kernel and all
related projects.  There, the policy is that you are to *always* CC everyone
that should (or might even remotely need to) get an email, in addition to
sending it to the lists.  Otherwise, the chances that such an email will be
lost in the ocean of stuff, or never reach the right people.

[snip]


In the end, it boils down to the fact that most people have lame mail
filtering setups that cannot sort delivery mailboxes in the right priority
and do proper destination-based duplicate supression (so that you can get
automated if it is also destined to a Debian ML, file into the ML folder,
and have any further duplicates supressed), and are not in any hurry to
deploy one.


I thought kernel hackers were uber-geeks.  How can they not 
implement decent mail filtering?  If you use Mutt, you take upon 
yourself the responsibility to set up a server-side filter, and if 
you use a GUI, then setting up client-side filtering is trivially easy.


(Of course, even if you use a GUI, if you are a geek you should 
implement fetchmail/getmail, an MTA, a spam filter and procmail or 
mailfilter and IMAP, so that you can switch MUAs as easily as you 
switch underwear, or even access your mail from across the LAN or 
even Internet.  But that's a different topic...)


--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

Ron Johnson wrote:
 (Of course, even if you use a GUI, if you are a geek you should
 implement fetchmail/getmail, an MTA, a spam filter and procmail or
 mailfilter and IMAP, so that you can switch MUAs as easily as you switch
 underwear, or even access your mail from across the LAN or even
 Internet.  But that's a different topic...)

Ha, whimp!  I change MUAs easier than I switch underwear!  :P





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy


On 11/22/08 09:10, Steve Lamb wrote:

Ron Johnson wrote:

(Of course, even if you use a GUI, if you are a geek you should
implement fetchmail/getmail, an MTA, a spam filter and procmail or
mailfilter and IMAP, so that you can switch MUAs as easily as you switch
underwear, or even access your mail from across the LAN or even
Internet.  But that's a different topic...)


Ha, whimp!  I change MUAs easier than I switch underwear!  :P


Wear fewer clothes...

--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-22 Thread Teemu Likonen

Steve Lamb (2008-11-22 04:40 -0800) wrote:

 On Saturday 22 November 2008 04:15:42 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
 Actually, to be very blunt: CCing people is absolutely the only way
 to deal with massive ammounts of email and very-high-traffic lists
 when you *care* about not ignoring email that you should have read.

 That is absolute, 100% pure rubbish. This is solvable by technical
 means, right now, today, if email client authors would just implement
 a feature [...]

I think that being solvable is not an option. Too many if's in your
message. I'd like to remind everybody that email is a distributed
system. We can't control what others do, we can only choose what we do
ourselves and which mail messages we pay attention to. The fact is that
mail is read with many different devices with different software and
with different features and configurations. Obviously it is also read by
different people with varying level of expertise. Mailing lists are read
through mail-to-news gateways which may or may not support bidirectional
message delivery. Some people read mail trough web-based mailing list
archives because they're only occasionally interesting in the list
discussion. Some people filter their mail differently depending on if
they are in the To field or in the Cc field. Some discussion threads are
cross-posted to two or more mailing lists because it concerns more than
one developer group. Perhaps the discussion is also CCed to some
email-based bug tracking system and the original bug reporter.

In short, we don't know how others receive, read and compose their mail,
or who are subscribers of certain mailing list (people join and leave
all the time). What kind of reply policies and email-client
configurations we should enforce for these varying situations? I think
they would soon became quite complicated. How do we make people to
understand and follow such policies?

My opinion: there's no way. Surely there are policies and there are
email standards. But there is also the practice.

On a large scale, perhaps with a little exaggeration, there are only two
quite reliable features in email:

 1. Reply
 2. Reply to all

Anything that requires more advanced technique and configuration than
these can't be trusted to work reliably. System must be based on these
two. Other features may _sometimes_ work.

People can (and very likely will) talk endlessly about the correct and
incorrect usage of Mail-Followup-To and Reply-To headers, about good and
bad email clients, good and bad configuration etc., but I don't think it
will ever prevent mail from going sometimes to wrong places. We can't
really control how other people send their mail; we can only choose what
we read (or ignore) and how we configure our own system.

So I assume that, for large audience, only Reply and Reply to all
work reliably. Based on that there are generally two ways for making a
mailing list sort of work for normal people without endless and
error-prone configuration and header-editing hassle:

 1. Tell people to press the Reply button and configure mailing
list software to add Reply-To header which points to the list
address.
 2. Tell people to press the Reply to all button.

Both have their advantages and disadvantages and the subject has been
pretty much discussed to death. In the option 2 a person may perhaps
edit the recipient fields manually but there's no guarantee that he will
edit it correctly from some other person's point of view.

Then there's the Debian way: Reply-To is not pointing to the list
address and using Reply to all is discouraged. Some people like this
policy. Nevertheless, it causes some difficulties: people sometimes
press Reply and thus send mail to the author only while expecting it
to go to the list. Sometimes they expect something else. Sometimes
people press Reply to all and annoy some other people with
carbon-copies and duplicate messages. So even with the Debian way,
depending on the point of view, mail sometimes goes to wrong places.

This is the reality and it's pretty complicated. It's not because people
are stupid or something; it's because it is impossible on enforce a
perfectly unified policy and client configuration in distributed system.
So let's just configure our own email clients so that dealing with the
reality and different lists is as easy as possible.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-22 Thread Andrei Popescu

On Sat,22.Nov.08, 20:44:35, Teemu Likonen wrote:
 
  1. Tell people to press the Reply button and configure mailing
 list software to add Reply-To header which points to the list
 address.

This goes against the standards (and you probably know it). One thing I 
like about Debian is that it sticks to the standards even if it is in 
minority.

Of the open-source mailers I know only Thunderbird/Icedove doesn't 
support Reply-To-List by default. Claws-Mail even has a smart Reply 
button that does Reply-To-List by default if it detects a list. Now it's 
time for the webmails to implement it.

Regards,
Andrei
-- 
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstein)


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

On Saturday 22 November 2008 12:49:29 Andrei Popescu wrote:
 Of the open-source mailers I know only Thunderbird/Icedove doesn't
 support Reply-To-List by default. Claws-Mail even has a smart Reply
 button that does Reply-To-List by default if it detects a list. Now it's
 time for the webmails to implement it.

Squirrelmail supports it with an addon which, unlike TBird's, actually 
works!  In fact it also recognizes the list-unsubscribe header, too.

-- 
 Steve C. Lamb | But who can decide what they dream
   PGP Key: 1FC01004   |  and dream I do
---+-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

On Saturday 22 November 2008 09:39:12 Ron Johnson wrote:
 Wear fewer clothes...

Nah, I change underwear once a day.  Most days I move from my home machine 
which is still on TBird to a work VM on which I test KMail.  So 3 client 
changes an average day vs. 1 underwear change.  :)

-- 
 Steve C. Lamb | But who can decide what they dream
   PGP Key: 1FC01004   |  and dream I do
---+-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

On Saturday 22 November 2008 10:44:35 Teemu Likonen wrote:
 Steve Lamb (2008-11-22 04:40 -0800) wrote:
  That is absolute, 100% pure rubbish. This is solvable by technical
  means, right now, today, if email client authors would just implement
  a feature [...]

 I think that being solvable is not an option. Too many if's in your
 message.

No, there was one.  If they implemented scoring.  I went on to explain 
that it is still possible today through other means.  Scoring, however, is one 
of the most efficient ways of handling a large volume of correspondence in a 
public forum.  I feel that email clients would benefit from letting people 
score mailing lists.  But that isn't a requirement to spot mail to you in a 
list.

 I'd like to remind everybody that email is a distributed
 system.

Yes, so the axiom of any distributed system applies.  *Be CONSERVATIVE IN 
WHAT YOU SEND, be liberal in what you accept.*  Message + CC is not 
conservative.

 We can't control what others do, we can only choose what we do
 ourselves and which mail messages we pay attention to. 

None of the situations you cited are compelling enough to warrant the 
complete duplication of every message the list server sends out.  Not a one.

 In short, we don't know how others receive, read and compose their mail,
 or who are subscribers of certain mailing list (people join and leave
 all the time).

Exactly.  That is why we provide CCs *when requested* because that is the 
*conservative* approach on what to send.  We're presuming they can take care 
of the method of reading replies unless otherwise told.  The alternative is 
hardly conservative.

 What kind of reply policies and email-client
 configurations we should enforce for these varying situations? I think
 they would soon became quite complicated. How do we make people to
 understand and follow such policies?

I have an idea.  Provide CCs when requested, draw up a list of acceptable 
behavior in the list and have people read that before they sign up.  Call it a 
Code of Conduct.  Oh... wait...  

 Then there's the Debian way: Reply-To is not pointing to the list
 address and using Reply to all is discouraged. Some people like this
 policy. Nevertheless, it causes some difficulties: people sometimes
 press Reply and thus send mail to the author only while expecting it
 to go to the list. Sometimes they expect something else. Sometimes
 people press Reply to all and annoy some other people with
 carbon-copies and duplicate messages. So even with the Debian way,
 depending on the point of view, mail sometimes goes to wrong places.

But that is not the point.  The point isn't to prevent people from sending 
mail to the wrong place as wrong varies from message to message.  The 
point is which policy sensibly places the least strain on the greatest number 
of people.  Defaulting to CC to all means everyone has to either delete all 
duplicate messages or implement MDA/MTA/MUA duplicate filters.

Simply put *some* people missing *some* mail *some* of the time or *some* 
people sending mail to the wrong place *some* of the time is less strain on 
the system as a whole compared to *all* people having to manually or 
automatically deal with *all* duplicates *all* of the time.

 This is the reality and it's pretty complicated.

I see it as pretty simple.  A person posts.  They, now, have dozens of 
ways to check for replies.  There is simply no need for a broad CC-everybody 
because someone, somewhere, for some reason might be incapable of getting some 
replies.

-- 
 Steve C. Lamb | But who can decide what they dream
   PGP Key: 1FC01004   |  and dream I do
---+-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy


On 11/22/08 19:47, Steve Lamb wrote:

On Saturday 22 November 2008 09:39:12 Ron Johnson wrote:

Wear fewer clothes...


Nah, I change underwear once a day.  Most days I move from my home machine 
which is still on TBird to a work VM on which I test KMail.  So 3 client 
changes an average day vs. 1 underwear change.  :)


Don't wear underwear?

--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

On Saturday 22 November 2008 19:40:14 Ron Johnson wrote:
 Don't wear underwear?

AKA, the commando geek!  Certainly one I would hope is able to filter on 
in-reply-to.  ;)

-- 
 Steve C. Lamb | But who can decide what they dream
   PGP Key: 1FC01004   |  and dream I do
---+-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-21 Thread Chris Bannister

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 03:48:57AM +0100, s. keeling wrote:
 On the other hand, there's a world full of Windows users out there who
 know that top-posting is the right way to reply.

It's normally the minority of people which get it right, therefore if
you are in the majority you are probably wrong.

-- 
Chris.
==
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god
than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other
possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
   -- Stephen F Roberts


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-21 Thread Chris Bannister

On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 01:15:58PM +0100, Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
 Chris Bannister wrote:
  It makes more sense to either not allow posting unless subscribed or
  have an open list but cc unless they explicitly request not be cc'd.
  
  Can anyone explain why the current policy is sane?
 
 Maybe someone is in an 'emergency' or 'on the road' in an internet cafe
 without access to their regular e-mail account. It's nice if you can
 post under those circumstances.

Quite right, but why discourage CCing on an open list? I can see the
point in not CCing on a closed list.
 
 It is also not really necessary to subscribe in order to read the
 replies; they are available (after a short delay) at
 
 http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2008/11/threads.html

And newbies know about that?

 Hope this explains,

Sorry, it doesn't explain why CCing is discouraged on an open list.

-- 
Chris.
==
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god
than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other
possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
   -- Stephen F Roberts


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-21 Thread Chris Bannister

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 04:27:47AM +0100, s. keeling wrote:
 Chris Bannister [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
   On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 12:30:04AM -0600, Mark Allums wrote:
   makes this mistake, though.  And I seem to remember a few posts where it  
   was brought up that some users who post are not subscribed.  So, go 
   figure.
  
   Catch 22 -- if they are not subscribed they will not be able to read
   any .sig file asking to be cc'd if not subscribed. Also they will not
   rec any replies if not subscribed. :(
 
 I'm not sure I understand that.

If a newbie isn't subscribed and they send a message to the list (not
knowing CoC) they will not rec a reply to their problem unless they hunt
for it on the website. This may cause the newbie to go back to Vista. :-(

One of the *BSD mailing lists explicitly CC's because there are newbies
posting.
 
[..]
   It makes more sense to either not allow posting unless subscribed
   or have an open list but cc unless they explicitly request not be
   cc'd.
 
 I'm not subscribed, and haven't been for years.  I read the list in
 the nntp mail to news gateway (cf. Usenet).  Don't assume people are
 only going to do it in the ways you know of.  There may be/likely are
 many other ways.

No doubt, but I don't see the relevance. Am I wrong to assume newbies
may not do this.

   Can anyone explain why the current policy is sane?
 
 History.  It makes sense if you know why the choices were made, a long
 time ago, using much different software, and much different user
 mores.  With current (read possibly compliant) software, it's a
 shot in the dark, requiring much research to find software that either
 works as it should or works as *it* thinks is best.  I prefer the former.

I mean with regarding to not CCing on an open list. I don't think it has
anything to do with software.
 
 Back on topic, I've been using the .sig below for years, and the
 Please don't Cc: me has also been ignored for years.

That is a problem. On the bright side, at least you don't miss out on
your reply.

 Perhaps we need one of the listmasters to enforce the usage
 guidelines?  Post HTML or Cc: too often, and ...

Why can't we police ourselves? Normally, a polite message to the
offender is sufficient. Unfortunately, HTML postings are occurring quite
regularly, so any polite message is likely to be taken as a why pick on
me, lots of other people are doing it.

Basically, what I'm saying is If the poster seems to be a newbie then
CC them, maybe with a note saying if they are subscribed then ask to
drop the CC. Obviously, this doesn't apply to regular posters, or
posters with an @debian.org address, etc.

-- 
Chris.
==
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god
than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other
possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
   -- Stephen F Roberts


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-21 Thread Andrei Popescu

On Sat,22.Nov.08, 02:45:51, Chris Bannister wrote:
 
 Quite right, but why discourage CCing on an open list? I can see the
 point in not CCing on a closed list.
  
Cc'ing on a closed list would be really stupid :)

  It is also not really necessary to subscribe in order to read the
  replies; they are available (after a short delay) at
  
  http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2008/11/threads.html
 
 And newbies know about that?
 
  Hope this explains,
 
 Sorry, it doesn't explain why CCing is discouraged on an open list.

New posters should read the Code of Conduct? Listmasters, would you 
consider adding a link to the CoC at the bottom of list mails?

Regards,
Andrei
-- 
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstein)


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-21 Thread Ken Irving

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 07:12:55PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
 On Sat,22.Nov.08, 02:45:51, Chris Bannister wrote:
  
  Sorry, it doesn't explain why CCing is discouraged on an open list.
 
 New posters should read the Code of Conduct? Listmasters, would you 
 consider adding a link to the CoC at the bottom of list mails?

:-)

Maybe it's just me, but I find it ironic that something is suggested
top be added to the bottom of messages in a message that wouldn't
show it if it was there.  Here's what I see (using mutt) after the 
above line (quote marks added):

 
 Regards,
 Andrei
 --
 If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
 (Albert Einstein)
  
 [-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
 [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 0.2K --]
 
 [-- application/pgp-signature is unsupported (use 'v' to view this part) --]

Maybe that problem should be fixed before adding more stuff?  Granted,
the majority of d-u messages are not multipart-encoded, so the special
list suffix lines are usually visible.  Even if visible, though, I doubt
that a CoC link would do much good.

Ken

-- 
Ken Irving


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-21 Thread Alex Samad

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 07:12:55PM +0200, Andrei Popescu wrote:
 On Sat,22.Nov.08, 02:45:51, Chris Bannister wrote:
  

[snip]

 New posters should read the Code of Conduct? Listmasters, would you 
 consider adding a link to the CoC at the bottom of list mails?
do we need more stuff on the bottom ?

 
 Regards,
 Andrei
 -- 
 If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
 (Albert Einstein)



-- 
One minute I'm just another rabbit and happy about it, next minute
*whazaam*, I'm thinking. That's a major drawback if you're looking for
happiness as a rabbit, let me tell you. You want grass and sex, not
thoughts like 'What's it all about, when you get right down to it?'
(Moving Pictures)


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-21 Thread Don Armstrong

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008, Andrei Popescu wrote:
 On Sat,22.Nov.08, 02:45:51, Chris Bannister wrote:  
  Quite right, but why discourage CCing on an open list? I can see the
  point in not CCing on a closed list.
   
 Cc'ing on a closed list would be really stupid :)

Actually, that's the one place where anyone not on the list would
request carbon copies. (But it still shouldn't be the default.)
 
  Sorry, it doesn't explain why CCing is discouraged on an open
  list.

Because people who are subscribed to the list don't require extra
copies of mails. [And since anyone who wants a copy can request it
using MFT: or manually, it's perfectly fine.]

 New posters should read the Code of Conduct? Listmasters, would you
 consider adding a link to the CoC at the bottom of list mails?

http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct is linked from the
introduction, which is on the page where you learn what lists we have
and how to subscribe to them. Someone who doesn't bother to read that
won't bother to read the links posted at the bottom of a mail.


Don Armstrong

-- 
My spelling ability, or rather the lack thereof, is one of the wonders
of the modern world.

http://www.donarmstrong.com  http://rzlab.ucr.edu


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-21 Thread Andrei Popescu

On Fri,21.Nov.08, 12:23:43, Don Armstrong wrote:
 On Fri, 21 Nov 2008, Andrei Popescu wrote:
  On Sat,22.Nov.08, 02:45:51, Chris Bannister wrote:  
   Quite right, but why discourage CCing on an open list? I can see the
   point in not CCing on a closed list.

  Cc'ing on a closed list would be really stupid :)
 
 Actually, that's the one place where anyone not on the list would
 request carbon copies. (But it still shouldn't be the default.)

I understood the closed as subscriber only, but I'm sure Chris will 
correct me if I was wrong.

Regards,
Andrei
-- 
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstein)


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-21 Thread Brian Marshall

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 09:12:39AM -0900, Ken Irving wrote:
  
  Regards,
  Andrei
  --
  If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
  (Albert Einstein)
   
  [-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
  [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Encoding: 7bit, Size: 0.2K --]
  
  [-- application/pgp-signature is unsupported (use 'v' to view this part) --]

Odd. I see the list signatures with mutt, but PGP signatures are
recognized for me.

-- 
Brian


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-21 Thread Brian Marshall

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 02:31:25PM -0800, Brian Marshall wrote:
 Odd. I see the list signatures with mutt, but PGP signatures are
 recognized for me.

Whoops, I just checked that message again and noticed that the list
signature wasn't added with the attached PGP signature. Sorry.

-- 
Brian


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-21 Thread Brad Rogers

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:35:54 -0800
Brian Marshall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Hello Brian,

 Whoops, I just checked that message again and noticed that the list
 signature wasn't added with the attached PGP signature. Sorry.

There's some weirdness that results in it not always being displayed.
Viewing message source reveals that it is indeed there.

-- 
 Regards  _
 / )   The blindingly obvious is
/ _)radnever immediately apparent

Black man got a lot of problems, but he don't mind throwing a brick
White Riot - The Clash


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-21 Thread Ken Irving

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 02:35:54PM -0800, Brian Marshall wrote:
 On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 02:31:25PM -0800, Brian Marshall wrote:
  Odd. I see the list signatures with mutt, but PGP signatures are
  recognized for me.
 
 Whoops, I just checked that message again and noticed that the list
 signature wasn't added with the attached PGP signature. Sorry.

Take another look at the raw, unfiltered message and you'll see that
the list signature is there, appended as it is for every message.  The
list software doesn't make any attempt to ammend the message as could
be done pretty easily.  I really don't know why that is.

Ken

-- 
Ken Irving


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-21 Thread Ken Irving

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 10:40:16PM +, Brad Rogers wrote:
 On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:35:54 -0800
 Brian Marshall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 Hello Brian,
 
  Whoops, I just checked that message again and noticed that the list
  signature wasn't added with the attached PGP signature. Sorry.
 
 There's some weirdness that results in it not always being displayed.
 Viewing message source reveals that it is indeed there.

  http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=345283

Ken

-- 
Ken Irving


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-21 Thread Ron Johnson


On 11/21/08 14:23, Don Armstrong wrote:
[snip]


Because people who are subscribed to the list don't require extra
copies of mails. [And since anyone who wants a copy can request it
using MFT: or manually, it's perfectly fine.]


MFT?

--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-20 Thread Andrei Popescu

On Wed,19.Nov.08, 14:02:37, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
 On Wednesday 19 November 2008, Andrei Popescu [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 wrote about 'Re: Q: List Policy':
 On Mon,17.Nov.08, 22:03:20, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
  It would be nice for the list to auto-respond to any HTML posting with
 
 I'm pretty sure you won't see something like this from Debian lists.
 
 :(  Why not?  Some enforcement of List Policy wouldn't be bad.
 
Maybe, but the autoresponder stuff is just not The Debian Way (tm).  
Besides, the regular threads like this one already serve as reminder for 
those who would care. The people who don't care about the CoC would just 
ignore (or filter out) the auto-responder.

  As far as the CC's, I suppose I'll just have to admonish those
  individuals directly.  (It would be nigh impossible for the list
  software to know the the poster had requested a CC or not.)  I can
  always killfile them if they get too annoying.  ;)
 
 This works for me (with maildrop):
 
 # bad replies from lists
 if (/^(To|Cc):.*lists.debian.org/:h 
  /^(To|Cc):[EMAIL PROTECTED]/:h) to Maildir/.Junk/
 
 Hard to apply list-wide since sometimes a CC *is* requested.  My point was 
 that the list software can't tell if the poster requested a CC or not.
 
Not list-wide, this is for personal use only.

 Also, I'm not subscribed to every Debian list, and this rule might throw 
 away something that was sent to both me and a list I'm not on.

It's not really thrown away, it just goes to a special folder and makes 
the repeated offenders easier to spot ;)

Regards,
Andrei
-- 
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstein)


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-19 Thread Ron Johnson


On 11/19/08 01:54, Steve Lamb wrote:

Ron Johnson wrote:

But since most users (and probably developers) of Tbird are on Windows,
they just don't have the same ethos as old-time midrange admins, and so
I'm just thanking $DEITY that the plugin system exists.


Even then there is a huge barrier to entry.  I would love to write a
plugin for TBird which implements buttons from PMMail/2 (circa 1995).


Ah, OS/2.  In it's day, it was the perfect synthesis of text and 
GUI.  PM was truly object-oriented in such a useful manner, and ran 
*well* on an 8MB 486DX33.


Modern GUIs could learn a lot from it...


Delete-and-Next, Delete-and-Previous, Delete-And close.  Then the same choices
for move and copy.  They made reading messages in a separate window sane and
haven't been seen since.

I've tried but TBird's plugin architecture isn't documented as a sole
entity.  There is no document, that I am aware of, that describes how to write
a TBird plugin which doesn't start with To set up your Firefox development
environment...

Pisses me off to no end.




--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-19 Thread Andrei Popescu

On Mon,17.Nov.08, 22:03:20, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
 
 Well, there has to be some punishment for not following the rules, or 
 people won't follow them, right?
 
 It would be nice for the list to auto-respond to any HTML posting with 
 a You've posted HTML, which is against list policy, please configure your 
 client to send plain text email. message.  Following that notice would be 
 instruction on how to do this for various clients, and instructions for 
 who to email with corrections if the instructions are wrong or incomplete.
 
I'm pretty sure you won't see something like this from Debian lists.

 As far as the CC's, I suppose I'll just have to admonish those individuals 
 directly.  (It would be nigh impossible for the list software to know the 
 the poster had requested a CC or not.)  I can always killfile them if they 
 get too annoying.  ;)

This works for me (with maildrop):

# bad replies from lists
if (/^(To|Cc):.*lists.debian.org/:h  /^(To|Cc):[EMAIL PROTECTED]/:h)
to Maildir/.Junk/

Regards,
Andrei
-- 
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
(Albert Einstein)


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-19 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.

On Wednesday 19 November 2008, Andrei Popescu [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote about 'Re: Q: List Policy':
On Mon,17.Nov.08, 22:03:20, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
 It would be nice for the list to auto-respond to any HTML posting with

I'm pretty sure you won't see something like this from Debian lists.

:(  Why not?  Some enforcement of List Policy wouldn't be bad.

 As far as the CC's, I suppose I'll just have to admonish those
 individuals directly.  (It would be nigh impossible for the list
 software to know the the poster had requested a CC or not.)  I can
 always killfile them if they get too annoying.  ;)

This works for me (with maildrop):

# bad replies from lists
if (/^(To|Cc):.*lists.debian.org/:h 
 /^(To|Cc):[EMAIL PROTECTED]/:h) to Maildir/.Junk/

Hard to apply list-wide since sometimes a CC *is* requested.  My point was 
that the list software can't tell if the poster requested a CC or not.

Also, I'm not subscribed to every Debian list, and this rule might throw 
away something that was sent to both me and a list I'm not on.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy   `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/  \_/ 


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)

2008-11-18 Thread S.D.Allen

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 01:38:36 -0600, Ron Johnson in gmane.linux.debian.user 
wrote:

 The only issue I see with it is that each line ends with a =20 and 
 that text MUAs might not filter that part out.

Yes I agree. It doesn't here on slrn. It would be nice if the quoted
printable could be turned off for this list. Boyd ... 8)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)

2008-11-18 Thread Ken Irving

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 01:38:36AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
 On 11/18/08 01:19, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
 On Monday 17 November 2008, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote  
 about 'Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)':
 Your email, though text, is really a quoted-printable attachment.
 Tbird displays it as text, but eliminates the pgp-signature and the
 list-supplied signature.

 Yes, that's the S/MIME standard for signed email.  Well, the extra  
 signature at the bottom isn't, but that's not part of the message I 
 send the mailing list.

 AFAIK, there's no List Policy against 7-bit clean mail (which requires  
 either UUENCODE or quoted-printable [or bans all non-ASCI characters]) 
 or cryptographic signatures of a reasonable (and fixed no less!) 
 length.

 That said, if the list would prefer I not sign my emails or use inline  
 signatures, I can change that easily.

 The only issue I see with it is that each line ends with a =20 and  
 that text MUAs might not filter that part out.

 Also, it might (or might not...) be a Tbird bug that it doesn't show the 
 UNSUBSCRIBE signature.

This might be a long-standing issue with smartlist, where the signature
is appended to the end of the message but may end up being hidden if the
message is structured.  It works fine for plain text messages, and maybe
also for some MIME forms if the last one is visible.  The list software 
does not change, mung, or otherwise mess with message bodies other than
appending the optional stuff at the end, and it would have to jump through
some hoops to work properly with MIME messages, e.g., at least terminate
the last such section.  Or so I dimly recall...

Ken

-- 
Ken Irving, [EMAIL PROTECTED]


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)

2008-11-18 Thread Ron Johnson


On 11/18/08 03:35, Ken Irving wrote:
[snip]
also for some MIME forms if the last one is visible.  The list software 
does not change, mung, or otherwise mess with message bodies other than


Well it should!

--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-18 Thread Osamu Aoki

Hi,  Here is fact ...

On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 01:43:53PM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
 I was fairly sure that the policy for this list, and most of the Debian 
 mailing lists was to NOT CC the poster in replies unless they requested 
 it.  Is that correct?

See http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct

# When replying to messages on the mailing list, do not send a carbon
# copy (CC) to the original poster unless they explicitly request to be
# copied.

# If you want to complain to someone who sent you a carbon copy when you
# did not ask for it, do it privately.

Osamu


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)

2008-11-18 Thread Ken Irving

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 06:43:49AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
 On 11/18/08 03:35, Ken Irving wrote:
 [snip]
 also for some MIME forms if the last one is visible.  The list software 
 does not change, mung, or otherwise mess with message bodies other than

 Well it should!

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=345283

It looks to me like the issue was dropped because the list admins were
satisfied that the debian lists follow RFC 2369 and put the unsubscribe
url in the headers.  A procmail recipe was offered to grab the multipart
boundary string from the headers and use it to terminate the last MIME
section, then add the unsubscribe footer.

Ken

-- 
Ken Irving


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)

2008-11-18 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.

On Tuesday 18 November 2008, S.D.Allen 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: Here's something 
interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)':
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 01:38:36 -0600, Ron Johnson in gmane.linux.debian.user 
wrote:
 The only issue I see with it is that each line ends with a =20 and
 that text MUAs might not filter that part out.

Yes I agree. It doesn't here on slrn. It would be nice if the quoted
printable could be turned off for this list. Boyd ... 8)

Um, no.  Quoted-printable and UUENCODE are the only standard way to include 
8-bit characters in email and UUENCODE isn't MIME-compliant.

I'm fine switching my messages to text/plain vs. multipart/signed by not 
signing them or using an inline signature.  I'm not fine with not being 
able to send non-ASCII characters to the list.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy   `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/  \_/ 


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Q: List Policy (ot)

2008-11-18 Thread Alex Samad

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 04:27:47AM +0100, s. keeling wrote:
 Chris Bannister [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
   On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 12:30:04AM -0600, Mark Allums wrote:

[snip]

 
 I'm not subscribed, and haven't been for years.  I read the list in
 the nntp mail to news gateway (cf. Usenet).  Don't assume people are
 only going to do it in the ways you know of.  There may be/likely are
 many other ways.

Sounds like an interesting way to look at a mailing list, might have to
give it a go, any con's or gotcha's



 

[snip]

 

-- 
One thing is clear, is relations between America and Russia are good, and 
they're important that they be good.

- George W. Bush
07/15/2006
Strelna, Russia


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-18 Thread Chris Jones

On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 09:20:13PM EST, s. keeling wrote:
 Chris Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
   Patrick Wiseman a écrit :
   ...
   
   And why do you send message in text+HTML format to this list ? ;-)
  
   Yeah .. it took me a while to figure out how I could get mutt to display
   the text/plain version rather than the text/html version which ended up
   a total mess with no indentation.. no 's and naturally no coloring. 
 
 Please elaborate?  :-)

(1) http://www.geocities.com/fcky1000/fckx/before.png
(2) http://www.geocities.com/fcky1000/fckx/after.png

When hitting enter in mutt's index display I was getting some rather
messy rendering of the html version of the message via urlview-elinks
as demonstrated by the before (1) screenshot above.

I had lived with this annoyance for ages but decided it was time to do
something about it.

I googled for a while and not coming up with anything useful, I posted to
the mutt mailing list and s/o knew immediately what I was talking about
and advised I add the following to my .muttrc:

alternative_order text/plain text/html

.. and read the fine manual, of course.

This apparently did the trick -- see the (2) screenshot.

Now I can tell right away who says what, thanks to the 's and 's
and everything is correctly indented.. icing on the cake, my coloring
choices -- more like different shades of gray -- make it easier to read
through the message at a glance.

Now that I had the proper keyword .. alternative_order I googled
further and found some interesting posts that give me a feeling that
there's more to it than what I implemented .. but since it works for me
so far, I decided that I have no time to become a mail expert just  now
and will keep it on the back burner to investigate further is other
messages start causing trouble.

Sorry about my earlier post being cryptic.

Thanks!

CJ






-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)

Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 
  I'm fine switching my messages to text/plain vs. multipart/signed by not=20
  signing them or using an inline signature.  I'm not fine with not being=20
  able to send non-ASCII characters to the list.

What?  Why?  It's an email mailing list.  Yeah, yeah, utf-8 and all
that, but software should translate that for us, yes?  The list is
text?  Or do I misunderstand?


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html  Linux Counter #80292
- -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)

Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
  On 11/18/08 01:19, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
  On Monday 17 November 2008, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
  about 'Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)':
  Your email, though text, is really a quoted-printable attachment.
  Tbird displays it as text, but eliminates the pgp-signature and the
  list-supplied signature.

And (sorry) looks ugly in slrn.

  Yes, that's the S/MIME standard for signed email.  Well, the extra 
  signature at the bottom isn't, but that's not part of the message I send 
  the mailing list.
  
  AFAIK, there's no List Policy against 7-bit clean mail (which requires 
  either UUENCODE or quoted-printable [or bans all non-ASCI characters]) or 
  cryptographic signatures of a reasonable (and fixed no less!) length.
 
  The only issue I see with it is that each line ends with a =20 and 
  that text MUAs might not filter that part out.

I see that also (slrn).

  Also, it might (or might not...) be a Tbird bug that it doesn't show 
  the UNSUBSCRIBE signature.

Tbird.  I see the list sig also.


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html  Linux Counter #80292
- -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)

Ken Irving [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
  On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 06:43:49AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
  On 11/18/08 03:35, Ken Irving wrote:
  [snip]
  also for some MIME forms if the last one is visible.  The list software 
  does not change, mung, or otherwise mess with message bodies other than
 
  Well it should!
 
  http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=345283
 
  It looks to me like the issue was dropped because the list admins were
  satisfied that the debian lists follow RFC 2369 and put the unsubscribe
  url in the headers.  A procmail recipe was offered to grab the multipart
  boundary string from the headers and use it to terminate the last MIME

Drat, that leaves out those reading via mail to news gateway
linux.debian.user.  Drat.


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html  Linux Counter #80292
- -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy (ot)

Alex Samad [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
  On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 04:27:47AM +0100, s. keeling wrote:
  Chris Bannister [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 12:30:04AM -0600, Mark Allums wrote:
 
  [snip]
 
  I'm not subscribed, and haven't been for years.  I read the list in
  the nntp mail to news gateway (cf. Usenet).  Don't assume people are
  only going to do it in the ways you know of.  There may be/likely are
  many other ways.
 
  Sounds like an interesting way to look at a mailing list, might have to
  give it a go, any con's or gotcha's

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
lists.bofh.it  # gatekeeper of the MTN gateway; they can be difficult.
   # Until you configure your MTA correctly, you'll get nowhere.


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html  Linux Counter #80292
- -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)

2008-11-18 Thread S.D.Allen

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 14:53:47 -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. in 
gmane.linux.debian.user wrote:
 --nextPart1772980.aT8pGrQ5Ap
 Content-Type: text/plain;
   charset=iso-8859-1
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 Content-Disposition: inline

 On Tuesday 18 November 2008, S.D.Allen=20
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: Here's something=20
 interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)':
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 01:38:36 -0600, Ron Johnson in gmane.linux.debian.user=
=20
 wrote:
 The only issue I see with it is that each line ends with a =3D20 and
 that text MUAs might not filter that part out.

Yes I agree. It doesn't here on slrn. It would be nice if the quoted
printable could be turned off for this list. Boyd ... 8)

 Um, no.  Quoted-printable and UUENCODE are the only standard way to include=
=20
 8-bit characters in email and UUENCODE isn't MIME-compliant.

 I'm fine switching my messages to text/plain vs. multipart/signed by not=20
 signing them or using an inline signature.  I'm not fine with not being=20
 able to send non-ASCII characters to the list.

Just curious why not UTF-8 as a charset then ?


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)

2008-11-18 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.

On Tuesday 18 November 2008, S.D.Allen 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: Here's something 
interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)':
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 14:53:47 -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. in 
gmane.linux.debian.user wrote: 
 On Tuesday 18 November 2008, S.D.Allen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote about 'Re: Here's
 something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)':
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 01:38:36 -0600, Ron Johnson in
 gmane.linux.debian.user wrote:
 The only issue I see with it is that each line ends with a =3D20
 and that text MUAs might not filter that part out.

Yes I agree. It doesn't here on slrn. It would be nice if the quoted
printable could be turned off for this list. Boyd ... 8)

 Um, no.  Quoted-printable and UUENCODE are the only standard way to
 include
 8-bit characters in email and UUENCODE isn't MIME-compliant.

 I'm not fine with
 not being able to send non-ASCII characters to the list.

Just curious why not UTF-8 as a charset then ?

You'd still need quoted-printable for all the bytes with the 8th bit set 
that are part of UTF-8 encoded characters.  Quoted-printable gets around 
the need for 7-bit cleanness (required by relevant e-mail standards) -- no 
bytes in the range 128-255. UTF-8 actually ascribes *meaning* to sequences 
of bytes in that range, mapping the to Unicode code points 128 and above.

I do have my client use UTF-8 as needed.

Also, quoted-printable also allows whitespace to end a line, which is 
required for the text/plain MIME type option format=flowed.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy   `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/  \_/ 


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)

2008-11-18 Thread Ron Johnson


On 11/18/08 21:03, s. keeling wrote:

Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

[snip]
 Also, it might (or might not...) be a Tbird bug that it doesn't show 
 the UNSUBSCRIBE signature.


Tbird.  I see the list sig also.


Silly man!!!  Mozila apps have no bugs!!!

--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-18 Thread Steve Lamb

François Cerbelle wrote:
 Yes, there is some text... But it is acceptable because it did not alter
 neither what I wrote, nor the meaning of what I wrote.

It alters the contents of your message which is exactly what the post I
was replying to said should not happen.  Now you're providing exceptions to
that blanket rule.  Of course my point is that altering the content is
acceptable under certain situations and some people find altering reply-to in
certain situations acceptable whereas you do not.  That, of course, does not
make your view any more valid than theirs nor your blanket statement at all 
valid.

-- 
 Steve C. Lamb | But who can decide what they dream
   PGP Key: 1FC01004   |  and dream I do
---+-



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-18 Thread Steve Lamb

s. keeling wrote:
 Are we still waiting for killfiles in Mozilla (et al)'s nntp clients,
 or did they finally get around to that?

Heck if I know.  I never used killfiles.  Slrn + scoring was all I needed.
 Yeah, yeah, - is killing but it isn't confined to a single killfile.  :D

-- 
 Steve C. Lamb | But who can decide what they dream
   PGP Key: 1FC01004   |  and dream I do
---+-



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-18 Thread Steve Lamb

Ron Johnson wrote:
 But since most users (and probably developers) of Tbird are on Windows,
 they just don't have the same ethos as old-time midrange admins, and so
 I'm just thanking $DEITY that the plugin system exists.

Even then there is a huge barrier to entry.  I would love to write a
plugin for TBird which implements buttons from PMMail/2 (circa 1995).
Delete-and-Next, Delete-and-Previous, Delete-And close.  Then the same choices
for move and copy.  They made reading messages in a separate window sane and
haven't been seen since.

I've tried but TBird's plugin architecture isn't documented as a sole
entity.  There is no document, that I am aware of, that describes how to write
a TBird plugin which doesn't start with To set up your Firefox development
environment...

Pisses me off to no end.

-- 
 Steve C. Lamb | But who can decide what they dream
   PGP Key: 1FC01004   |  and dream I do
---+-



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-17 Thread Chris Bannister

On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 12:30:04AM -0600, Mark Allums wrote:
 makes this mistake, though.  And I seem to remember a few posts where it  
 was brought up that some users who post are not subscribed.  So, go 
 figure.

Catch 22 -- if they are not subscribed they will not be able to read
any .sig file asking to be cc'd if not subscribed. Also they will not
rec any replies if not subscribed. :(

It makes more sense to either not allow posting unless subscribed or
have an open list but cc unless they explicitly request not be cc'd.

Can anyone explain why the current policy is sane?

-- 
Chris.
==
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god
than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other
possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
   -- Stephen F Roberts


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-17 Thread Johannes Wiedersich

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Chris Bannister wrote:
 It makes more sense to either not allow posting unless subscribed or
 have an open list but cc unless they explicitly request not be cc'd.
 
 Can anyone explain why the current policy is sane?

Maybe someone is in an 'emergency' or 'on the road' in an internet cafe
without access to their regular e-mail account. It's nice if you can
post under those circumstances.

It is also not really necessary to subscribe in order to read the
replies; they are available (after a short delay) at

http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2008/11/threads.html

etc.

Hope this explains,

Johannes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkkhYH0ACgkQC1NzPRl9qEWqzACfSrK5T8v/akiwlV/odlCu2wPH
Tb0An1Uh68NNMKoUymkKOW4Q+QVHksK/
=/8Tg
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

Patrick Wiseman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
  --=_Part_24413_25996402.1226805705201
  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
  Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
  Content-Disposition: inline
 
  On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  On 11/15/08 13:43, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
 
  I was fairly sure that the policy for this list, and most of the Debian
  mailing lists was to NOT CC the poster in replies unless they requested it.
   Is that correct?
 
  Yup.
 
   I only ask because I've been getting a lot of CCs recently and I really,
 
  Gmail.  It's Evil.
 
  How so?

Well for one thing, I see:

  --=_Part_24413_25996402.1226805705201
  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
  Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
  Content-Disposition: inline

at the top of every/most gmail based posts, then another like that
followed by an html version of the text reply.  Thank you very much!
Turn off HTML on replies.  Please.

  When I reply to an email to this list, gmail presumes I want to
  reply to the sender.  I simply change the return address to the list.  I
  manage several forums on which I set Reply-To to the forum address; gmail
  respects that.  If there's a problem here, it's not gmail.

It's gmail's default behaviour that's infuriating.  You may have
learned your way around some of its ickyness, but not all.  Gmail
shouldn't have that stuff turned on by default.  Email clients ought
to have a Reply To List feature that works.


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html  Linux Counter #80292
- -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

Bob Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
  On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 01:05:36 -0600, Ron Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 
 wrote: 
 
  On 11/16/08 00:38, Celejar wrote:
  On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 00:33:43 -0600
  Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  The most common MUAs (and all webmail) don't allow Reply-to to be  
  set to anything other than what the application thinks it should be.
 
  Do you mean that MUAs don't allow the sender to set a custom Reply-to?
  Sylpheed does.
 
  As does Mutt, and probably Evolution.  But not Tbird, and certainly not 
  gmail.  Don't know about KMail.
 
  I'm not sure if this is relevant to this discussion, but using mutt in
  its lists friendly mode, i.e. by using, by default, L to post to a
  list, there is no Reply-To: header added, but rather a
  Mail-Followup-To: one instead.  How universally this is honoured by
  other email clients is another matter, of course.

L doesn't control what others do with your reply to the list.  mutt
has no control over that, as you point out.  It does control what your
choice to reply does.

We could be done with this entire discussion if we'd just recommend
subscribers use slrn and read the list in nntp://[mumble]/lists.debian.user

You *can* reply to sender in slrn, but that's not the default
behaviour.

   :-)


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html  Linux Counter #80292
- -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

Chris Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
  On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 02:27:28PM EST, François Cerbelle wrote:
  Patrick Wiseman a écrit :
  ...
  
  And why do you send message in text+HTML format to this list ? ;-)
 
  Yeah .. it took me a while to figure out how I could get mutt to display
  the text/plain version rather than the text/html version which ended up
  a total mess with no indentation.. no 's and naturally no coloring. 

Please elaborate?  :-)


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html  Linux Counter #80292
- -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 
  Ron Johnson wrote:
  It isn't that difficult to create Reply-to-List functionality.
 
  Tell that to the TBird developers.  We're going on, what, 4 years now=
   and
  counting?  :(

Are we still waiting for killfiles in Mozilla (et al)'s nntp clients,
or did they finally get around to that?

Hoestly, sometimes I think these deficiencies are politically
motivated.


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html  Linux Counter #80292
- -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
  On 11/17/08 00:33, François Cerbelle wrote:
  Steve Lamb a écrit :
 
  Really?  You believe that?  *looks at the footer appended to
  every message* Then, u, a header is the least of your
  concerns.  I look forward to your Don Quixote quest there, bub.
  
  Yes, there is some text... But it is acceptable because it did not alter 
  neither what I wrote, nor the meaning of what I wrote.
 
  Besides, it is explicitly marked by the --  as a signature.
 
 
  If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!
 
 

Hmm, tell that to the likes of Dan C in alt.os.linux.slackware, who
b*tch*s about people like you whose posts contain *two* sets of
sig-dashes; yours, and the list's.  Notice, slrn helpfully made your
sig part of the body, trimming the list's.  :-)  I wish it would trim
those extra exclamation marks too.

This problem is an education issue, no more.  Developers/implementors
ought to learn about what they're doing before they do it, shouldn't
be arrogant about *knowing* they have a better way, and the rest of us
need to tolerate and nudge infringers toward the One True Way.  Or, at
least I think that's how it's supposed to work.

On the other hand, there's a world full of Windows users out there who
know that top-posting is the right way to reply.


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html  Linux Counter #80292
- -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

Chris Bannister [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
  On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 12:30:04AM -0600, Mark Allums wrote:
  makes this mistake, though.  And I seem to remember a few posts where it  
  was brought up that some users who post are not subscribed.  So, go 
  figure.
 
  Catch 22 -- if they are not subscribed they will not be able to read
  any .sig file asking to be cc'd if not subscribed. Also they will not
  rec any replies if not subscribed. :(

I'm not sure I understand that.

Tangentially, I notice the web interface to the archives
strips/doesn't add in the first place, the list .sig to posts archived
there.  On the other hand, it explicitly splits the reply-to function
into reply-to-list, to poster-on-list, and to poster-off-list, which I
think is nice.

  It makes more sense to either not allow posting unless subscribed
  or have an open list but cc unless they explicitly request not be
  cc'd.

I'm not subscribed, and haven't been for years.  I read the list in
the nntp mail to news gateway (cf. Usenet).  Don't assume people are
only going to do it in the ways you know of.  There may be/likely are
many other ways.

  Can anyone explain why the current policy is sane?

History.  It makes sense if you know why the choices were made, a long
time ago, using much different software, and much different user
mores.  With current (read possibly compliant) software, it's a
shot in the dark, requiring much research to find software that either
works as it should or works as *it* thinks is best.  I prefer the former.

Back on topic, I've been using the .sig below for years, and the
Please don't Cc: me has also been ignored for years.

Perhaps we need one of the listmasters to enforce the usage
guidelines?  Post HTML or Cc: too often, and ...

Nah.  Dumb idea.

Love your .sig, btw.  :-)


-- 
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
(*)http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html  Linux Counter #80292
- -http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1855.htmlPlease, don't Cc: me.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

On Monday 17 November 2008, s. keeling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
about 'Re: Q: List Policy':
Hmm, tell that to the likes of Dan C in alt.os.linux.slackware, who
b*tch*s about people like you whose posts contain *two* sets of
sig-dashes; yours, and the list's.  Notice, slrn helpfully made your
sig part of the body, trimming the list's.  :-)  I wish it would trim
those extra exclamation marks too.

Pretty sure slrn is at fault there.  ISTR the guideline being that the 
signature starts at the first \n-- \n in the message.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy   `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/  \_/ 


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Q: List Policy

On Monday 17 November 2008, s. keeling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
about 'Re: Q: List Policy':
Perhaps we need one of the listmasters to enforce the usage
guidelines?  Post HTML or Cc: too often, and ...

Nah.  Dumb idea.

Well, there has to be some punishment for not following the rules, or 
people won't follow them, right?

It would be nice for the list to auto-respond to any HTML posting with 
a You've posted HTML, which is against list policy, please configure your 
client to send plain text email. message.  Following that notice would be 
instruction on how to do this for various clients, and instructions for 
who to email with corrections if the instructions are wrong or incomplete.

As far as the CC's, I suppose I'll just have to admonish those individuals 
directly.  (It would be nigh impossible for the list software to know the 
the poster had requested a CC or not.)  I can always killfile them if they 
get too annoying.  ;)
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy   `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/  \_/ 


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-17 Thread Patrick Wiseman

On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 11:03 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On Monday 17 November 2008, s. keeling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
 about 'Re: Q: List Policy':
 Perhaps we need one of the listmasters to enforce the usage
 guidelines?  Post HTML or Cc: too often, and ...
 
 Nah.  Dumb idea.

 Well, there has to be some punishment for not following the rules, or
 people won't follow them, right?

 It would be nice for the list to auto-respond to any HTML posting with
 a You've posted HTML, which is against list policy, please configure your
 client to send plain text email. message.  Following that notice would be
 instruction on how to do this for various clients, and instructions for
 who to email with corrections if the instructions are wrong or incomplete.

I used to be rabid about plain text emails (and still use pine), but
are there really email clients out there which can't handle
multi-content emails (pine now deals OK with html mail)?  Are there
clients sending emails which don't offer the alternative content
(plain or html)?  I know gmail sends both, and I think it does so in a
standards-compliant way.

I think this may be a battle lost.

Patrick


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

On Monday 17 November 2008, Patrick Wiseman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
about 'Re: Q: List Policy':
I used to be rabid about plain text emails

I'm not a rabid as I used to be; I'll even open the HTML from time to time.

Are there
clients sending emails which don't offer the alternative content
(plain or html)?  I know gmail sends both, and I think it does so in a
standards-compliant way.

Some people are still on some form of metered Internet access and would 
prefer no to have to pay to receive the same data twice, especially since 
the HTML is generally significantly larger and less useful.

Plus, even if the list policy is outdated, it is still *list policy* and 
should be followed until changed.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy   `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/  \_/ 


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Q: List Policy


On 11/17/08 22:32, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
[snip]


Plus, even if the list policy is outdated, it is still *list policy* and 
should be followed until changed.


By not listing any punishments for infractions, I think that they 
specifically meant the Code of conduct to be followed on the honor 
system.


But it was written long ago, when the only people who used Debian 
were Real Geeks, who would have just naturally followed most of the 
CoC anyway.


--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy


On 11/17/08 20:31, s. keeling wrote:

Steve Lamb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 Ron Johnson wrote:

It isn't that difficult to create Reply-to-List functionality.

 Tell that to the TBird developers.  We're going on, what, 4 years now=
  and
 counting?  :(


Are we still waiting for killfiles in Mozilla (et al)'s nntp clients,
or did they finally get around to that?

Hoestly, sometimes I think these deficiencies are politically
motivated.


*Somebody* at Mozilla certainly has a bug up their ass about RTL and 
killfile...


But since most users (and probably developers) of Tbird are on 
Windows, they just don't have the same ethos as old-time midrange 
admins, and so I'm just thanking $DEITY that the plugin system exists.


--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)


On 11/17/08 21:50, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
On Monday 17 November 2008, s. keeling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
about 'Re: Q: List Policy':

Hmm, tell that to the likes of Dan C in alt.os.linux.slackware, who
b*tch*s about people like you whose posts contain *two* sets of
sig-dashes; yours, and the list's.  Notice, slrn helpfully made your
sig part of the body, trimming the list's.  :-)  I wish it would trim
those extra exclamation marks too.


Pretty sure slrn is at fault there.  ISTR the guideline being that the 
signature starts at the first \n-- \n in the message.


Boyd,

Your email, though text, is really a quoted-printable attachment. 
Tbird displays it as text, but eliminates the pgp-signature and the 
list-supplied signature.


--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)

On Monday 17 November 2008, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
about 'Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)':
Your email, though text, is really a quoted-printable attachment.
Tbird displays it as text, but eliminates the pgp-signature and the
list-supplied signature.

Yes, that's the S/MIME standard for signed email.  Well, the extra 
signature at the bottom isn't, but that's not part of the message I send 
the mailing list.

AFAIK, there's no List Policy against 7-bit clean mail (which requires 
either UUENCODE or quoted-printable [or bans all non-ASCI characters]) or 
cryptographic signatures of a reasonable (and fixed no less!) length.

That said, if the list would prefer I not sign my emails or use inline 
signatures, I can change that easily.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy   `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/  \_/ 


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)


On 11/18/08 01:19, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
On Monday 17 November 2008, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
about 'Here's something interesting... (was Re: Q: List Policy)':

Your email, though text, is really a quoted-printable attachment.
Tbird displays it as text, but eliminates the pgp-signature and the
list-supplied signature.


Yes, that's the S/MIME standard for signed email.  Well, the extra 
signature at the bottom isn't, but that's not part of the message I send 
the mailing list.


AFAIK, there's no List Policy against 7-bit clean mail (which requires 
either UUENCODE or quoted-printable [or bans all non-ASCI characters]) or 
cryptographic signatures of a reasonable (and fixed no less!) length.


That said, if the list would prefer I not sign my emails or use inline 
signatures, I can change that easily.


The only issue I see with it is that each line ends with a =20 and 
that text MUAs might not filter that part out.


Also, it might (or might not...) be a Tbird bug that it doesn't show 
the UNSUBSCRIBE signature.


--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy


On 11/16/08 01:53, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
On Sunday 16 November 2008, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote 
about 'Re: Q: List Policy':

and certainly
not gmail.


I found it in my gmail settings: Settings - Accounts Tab - Reply-to 
Address (Optional)


I'm pleased to be wrong twice in one night.

But, still, the ability to set the Reply-to Address serves no 
purpose to someone subscribed to mailing lists, and wants to easily 
reply to the list.


--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-16 Thread Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.

On Sunday 16 November 2008 04:20, Ron Johnson wrote:
 The ability to set the Reply-to Address serves no
 purpose to someone subscribed to mailing lists, and wants to easily
 reply to the list.

I find the easiest, mostly client-independent way to do that is to 
Reply-To-All and then remove the email addresses I don't want to send to.  
(Also works with impromptu mailing lists.)

However, the Debian lists use the established, standard List-* headers.  If 
you client doesn't support them, please complain to the maintainer of your 
client.  (That may imply filing a Debian bug, but not against the mailing 
lists [infrastructure].)
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.                     ,= ,-_-. =. 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                      ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy           `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/                      \_/     


pgpm2Gyg3QnmK.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-16 Thread Eduardo M KALINOWSKI

Patrick Wiseman wrote:
 Oh, please.  What the heck do you know about the forums I manage?  I
 wasn't suggesting that Debian forums should set reply-to that way.  I
 was merely pointing out that misdirected replies are not gmail's fault,
 but the user's.

It is certainly possible to correctly reply to the list with Gmail,
unfortunately its interface does not make that as easy as possible.

Similarly, while it is possible to send text and not html mail, reply
interleavedly (as opposed to top-posting), and so on, Gmail does not
seem to encourage or make that so simple. And people tend to follow
Gmail's defaults.


-- 
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://move.to/hpkb


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-16 Thread Steve Lamb

Ron Johnson wrote:
 It isn't that difficult to create Reply-to-List functionality.

Tell that to the TBird developers.  We're going on, what, 4 years now and
counting?  :(

-- 
 Steve C. Lamb | But who can decide what they dream
   PGP Key: 1FC01004   |  and dream I do
---+-



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-16 Thread Steve Lamb

Ron Johnson wrote:
 Webmail and popular MUAs like Tbird and Lookout make it difficult to
 follow the no-CC rule.  Someone, though, has thoughtfully written a
 replytolist plugin for Tbird/Icedove.  Get v0.3.0 unless you use IMAP,
 which requires you to use v0.2.1.

Huh, first time I ever saw that IMAP didn't work on v0.3.0 of the plugin.
 Maybe that's why it hasn't been working for me for, ohhh, about a year?  :(

-- 
 Steve C. Lamb | But who can decide what they dream
   PGP Key: 1FC01004   |  and dream I do
---+-



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-16 Thread Patrick Wiseman

On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 1:33 AM, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

On 11/15/08 22:26, Patrick Wiseman wrote:

On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 11:09 PM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

On Saturday 15 November 2008, Patrick Wiseman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote
about 'Re: Q: List Policy':

On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 5:04 PM, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]

wrote:

On 11/15/08 13:43, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:

I was fairly sure that the policy for this list, and most of the
Debian mailing lists was to NOT CC the poster in replies unless they
requested it. Is that correct?

Yup.

I only ask because I've been getting a lot of CCs recently and I
really,

Gmail. It's Evil.

How so? When I reply to an email to this list, gmail presumes I want to
reply to the sender. I simply change the return address to the list. I
manage several forums on which I set Reply-To to the forum address;
gmail
respects that. If there's a problem here, it's not gmail.

http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html--http://woozle.org/%7Eneale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html--the
body of
which should actually be read after reading the first two references.

Oh, please. What the heck do you know about the forums I manage?

Forums (fora?) live on web servers. Why should they care about Reply-To?

Which just goes to show that you, too, know nothing about the for(ums|a) I
manage. They are indeed web-based, but they send and receive email posts.
Hence they care. (And, as far as I know, forum has absolutely nothing to
do with web; it's a term as old as the ancient Greeks, and I use it in
that sense, as a place for rational discourse.)

Patrick

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-16 Thread Napoleon


Ron Johnson wrote:

On 11/16/08 00:38, Celejar wrote:

On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 00:33:43 -0600
Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

...

The most common MUAs (and all webmail) don't allow Reply-to to be set 
to anything other than what the application thinks it should be.


Do you mean that MUAs don't allow the sender to set a custom Reply-to?
Sylpheed does.


As does Mutt, and probably Evolution.  But not Tbird, and certainly not 
gmail.  Don't know about KMail.




TBird allows you to set a custom reply-to.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-16 Thread Michael Marsh

On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 2:53 AM, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Sunday 16 November 2008, Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
 about 'Re: Q: List Policy':
and certainly
not gmail.

 I found it in my gmail settings: Settings - Accounts Tab - Reply-to
 Address (Optional)

That option doesn't show up for me, perhaps because I use the gmail
web interface exclusively, with the account not tied to another email
account.

That being said, if you're a gmail user, *please* request the
list-friendly features.  Google doesn't implement a feature unless
some threshold number of users request it, and the last time I looked
these particular features were optional or non-standard.

-- 
Michael A. Marsh
http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/~mmarsh
http://mamarsh.blogspot.com
http://36pints.blogspot.com


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy


On 11/16/08 06:23, Steve Lamb wrote:

Ron Johnson wrote:

Webmail and popular MUAs like Tbird and Lookout make it difficult to
follow the no-CC rule.  Someone, though, has thoughtfully written a
replytolist plugin for Tbird/Icedove.  Get v0.3.0 unless you use IMAP,
which requires you to use v0.2.1.


Huh, first time I ever saw that IMAP didn't work on v0.3.0 of the plugin.
 Maybe that's why it hasn't been working for me for, ohhh, about a year?  :(


According to the upstream website (and which I confirmed myself), 
using v0.3.0 with emails stored in IMAP kills Tbird as soon as you 
click on Replt-To-List.


--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy


On 11/16/08 04:36, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:

On Sunday 16 November 2008 04:20, Ron Johnson wrote:

The ability to set the Reply-to Address serves no
purpose to someone subscribed to mailing lists, and wants to easily
reply to the list.


I find the easiest, mostly client-independent way to do that is to 
Reply-To-All and then remove the email addresses I don't want to send to.  
(Also works with impromptu mailing lists.)


What as pain in the arse...

However, the Debian lists use the established, standard List-* headers.  If 
you client doesn't support them, please complain to the maintainer of your 
client.


Of course.  Which is why $SOMEONE wrote the Tbird replytolist plugin...

 (That may imply filing a Debian bug, but not against the mailing 
lists [infrastructure].)


--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

If you don't agree with me, you are worse than Hitler!!!


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy

2008-11-16 Thread Eduardo M KALINOWSKI

Ron Johnson wrote:
 Of course.  Which is why $SOMEONE wrote the Tbird replytolist plugin...
   

Unfortunately, that plugin does not work, at least for me and other
people that observed the same effect. It does not crash, the but
reply-to-list button is always disabled.


-- 
knghtbrd He's a about half the size of the others.
knghtbrd But he's got a chainsaw.

Eduardo M KALINOWSKI
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://move.to/hpkb


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Q: List Policy