> -----Original Message----- > From: Chad Walstrom [mailto:chewie at wookimus.net] > Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2003 10:01 AM > To: tclug-list at mn-linux.org > Subject: Email Etiquette, Again (was Re: [TCLUG] Jerry...) > > > Lawrence Clemens wrote about Jerry Ekegren's wonderful > vacation program: > > I don't think you are making friends! > > <rant mode="BOFH" flavor="kindly persecution"> > > Of course we are. You see, we, the appointed email list etiquette > police, have taken it upon ourselves to maintain some semblance of > sanity on this forum. > > > Not everyone on this list has control over their mail server > > configuration. > > Ah, I see that yet another luser -- that does stand for > "local user", by > the way -- has a misconception about who has "control" over > the vacation > program. Vacation programs are most often NOT server-based. They are > usually configured by the user, and that user doesn't always read the > instructions or use their valuable resources, their systems > administrator... On exchange it is send out of office replys to the web or not. If you have the correct version of outlook you can put in a rule not to to a certain address. > > > Blasting these people solves nothing and likely drives them away. > > Or it becomes a wake-up call that such automated replies are > not welcome > on the email list. Taken in context, I don't see how anyone would be > "driven away". If they are driven away, then they are obviously a > little too thin skinned for this group. > > > If linux is to gain wide acceptance some of it's users will have to > > give up their holier than thou attitudes about things such as the > > occasional html email, the occasional out of office > notification, the > > occasional top post, etc. > > Again, you are taking things out of context. This is NOT a > Linux issue, > this is an email list etiquette issue. I've seen a number of kindly > notices on the list for people to shape up their etiquette > and actually > THINK before posting the aforementioned crap. HTML email, autoreply > messages, and top posts are definitely not welcome, however > occassional > they might be. If we do not express our disapproval when these > occurrances happen, how will anyone know? > > Shame is a great motivator, but usually we don't have to > resort to that. If shame were a great motivator, X-windows would have long since been replaced :) > Regardless, the average profile of the TCLUG list member is that of a > knowledgable, sysadmin type with a precondition to be short with > clueless lusers. Don't hold it against us. We work with > lusers all day > long, and to have to deal with them on the list is not our idea of a > constructive forum for Linux. I hear ya. > > I'm not going to get into the Noise:Signal rant. You've all heard it > before. > </rant> > > -- > Chad Walstrom <chewie at wookimus.net> http://www.wookimus.net/ > assert(expired(knowledge)); /* core dump */ > > _______________________________________________ > TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota > http://www.mn-linux.org tclug-list at mn-linux.org > https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list > _______________________________________________ TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota http://www.mn-linux.org tclug-list at mn-linux.org https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list