Re: AUP/autoresponders, rehashed

[Alex Pilosov <alex () pilosoft com>]

[please note - followups are set to nanog-futures, this doesn't belong to 
nanog-list. respect the reply-to header and reply to nanog-futures ]

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Deepak Jain wrote:

> However, a tremendous amount of time is wasted just by discussing these
> sorts of "small" problems. Plenty of people contribute to nanog daily
> and don't feel the need to complain about it. It seems to me, the ones
> who contribute in spurts sometimes separated by months seem to have to
> less to complain about.
a) Talking often is not a measure of contribution to community. 

b) If we tolerate the annoying bounce emails, it doesn't mean we shouldn't 
fix the issue.


> That said, a very simple way to handle it is to separate your mail
> (whether its procmail, a separate mailbox, a + rule in your name, or
> what have you) to automatically catch these "horrible" autoresponders
> into a box that doesn't clutter your critical mail. I think that's how
> most of us do it.
>
> I think someone suggests the above everytime a discussion comes up. In
> the spirit of "a very simple solution", everyone can be their own
> dictator of their own mailbox -- they don't need to protect the rest of
> the list, or develop a consensus for change. Just fix it for yourself.  
> This is a time-honored NANOG tradition, at least when it comes to email.
In the sense that a time-honored network engineering tradition is "let 
others figure out how to deal with my broken routers/email clients/etc", 
maybe. But I don't think its a good tradition to keep ;)

-alex