| 1 |
Neil Bothwick: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I suppose what we really need is a standard header to be inserted by |
| 4 |
> auto-responders. Then mailing list software can simply ignore any such |
| 5 |
> mails. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
In theory a good solution. In practice I doubt it helps. |
| 8 |
Whoever is "able" to configure an auto-responder in such a completely |
| 9 |
brain-dead way, as we have seen recently, will very likely screw up |
| 10 |
adherence to such a standard too. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
In fact, all that's needed is already there (just the other way round, |
| 13 |
though): every list I'm subscribed to adds a "Precedence" header field |
| 14 |
(with values of "bulk" or "list") to the messages. A sane auto-responder |
| 15 |
will not send replies to messages containing this header field. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
No matter how you look at it - there's little that protects you against |
| 18 |
a dim-wit someone has told "you're sysadmin now". |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Regards |
| 21 |
mks |
Archives