List-Header Digest Archive: October 1997 http://www.nisto.com/list-spec/mail/ X-List-Help: , X-List-Unsubscribe: X-List-Subscribe: X-List-Archive: X-List-Post: X-List-Owner: Contents: -> [admin] arpp.carleton.ca service disruption by Grant Neufeld <(suppressed)@achilles.net> -> Lyris supports List- headers now by "John Buckman" <(suppressed)@shelby.com> -> Re: Lyris supports List- headers now by Mikael Hansen <(suppressed)@dnai.com> -> Re: Lyris supports List- headers now by "John Buckman" <(suppressed)@shelby.com> -> complaints about headers (was: Lyris supports List- headers now) by Grant Neufeld <(suppressed)@achilles.net> -> Re: complaints about headers by Will Mayall <(suppressed)@fogcity.com> -> Re: complaints about headers by Hunter Goatley <(suppressed)@process.com> -> Re: complaints about headers by Grant Neufeld <(suppressed)@achilles.net> -> Re: complaints about headers by Will Mayall <(suppressed)@fogcity.com> -> Re: complaints about headers by Mikael Hansen <(suppressed)@dnai.com> -> enhanced mailto URLs draft status by Grant Neufeld <(suppressed)@achilles.net> -> RE: Lyris supports List- headers now by "Avi Rappoport" <(suppressed)@starnine.com> -> Re: Lyris supports List- headers now by "Kent S. Larsen II" <(suppressed)@panix.com> -> RE: Lyris supports List- headers now by "John Buckman" <(suppressed)@shelby.com> -> RE: Lyris supports List- headers now by James Berriman <(suppressed)@frutiger.staffs.ac.uk> -> Re: Re: complaints about headers by "Joshua D. Baer" <(suppressed)@skyweyr.com> -> Re: complaints about headers by Christopher Allen <(suppressed)@consensus.com> -> Re: complaints about headers by "Clarence C. Wong" <(suppressed)@qualcomm.com> -> Re: complaints about headers by Will Mayall <(suppressed)@fogcity.com> -> Re: complaints about headers by "Bob Hartman" <(suppressed)@esoft.com> -> Re: "Boring Headers" by Christopher Allen <(suppressed)@consensus.com> -> Re: complaints about headers by Will Mayall <(suppressed)@fogcity.com> -> Re: complaints about headers by Keith Moore <(suppressed)@cs.utk.edu> -> Re: "Boring Headers" by "Kent S. Larsen II" <(suppressed)@panix.com> -> Re: complaints about headers by Dave Crocker <(suppressed)@brandenburg.com> -> [admin] arpp.carleton.ca service disruption by Grant Neufeld <(suppressed)@achilles.net> -> Re: complaints about headers by "Clarence C. Wong" <(suppressed)@qualcomm.com> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 11 Oct 1997 13:27:52 -0400 From: Grant Neufeld <(suppressed)@achilles.net> Subject: [admin] arpp.carleton.ca service disruption The arpp.carleton.ca server will experience a disruption of service at the end of this month and the beginning of the next (October 30 - November 6). The server may be unavailable during part or all of that period. The reason is that the server will be relocated to a different city at that time. I'm hoping the transition will be relatively invisible to the users of the system, but want to give you advance warning in case problems come up during the move. - -- grant@achilles.net grant@kagi.com http://arpp.carleton.ca/ O- <*> PGP 5: 4077 8306 9115 94B0 CEA6 F4F4 3B9A 9482 D158 7B9A ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Oct 1997 01:16:58 -0400 From: "John Buckman" <(suppressed)@shelby.com> Subject: Lyris supports List- headers now I've added direct support the list headers into the Lyris List Server program. This has been added as the default option for all Lyris mailing lists, and is a yes/no option that the list admin can choose. Previously, the list admin could add the header themselves as added SMTP header: this automatic method is much cleaner, and should significantly extend the impact of the spec. The headers that Lyris includes are: List-Software: Lyris Server version 2.50 beta 3.0, List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Owner: List-Help: X-URL: X-List-Host: lyris.net Predictably, several people have complained about the size of the new headers, but they have been (somewhat) appeased by my explanation that it's now so much easier to unsubscribe. I've only heard of one problem thus far. Evidently, a DOS mail program named "NetTamer" does not like messages with these headers (I don't know if it is size or content that's the problem), and cannot display Lyris-sent mail with these headers, *unless* they turn on their option to display all headers, in which case it works, but then they complain about seeing them. Thus far, about 140,000 people subscribed to lists on my lyris.net server have received mail with these headers, and I've received few comments, pro or con. I use Pegasus Mail as my main mail program, so I get to see a nice User Interface as a result of this. If anyone has any comments on the header implementation as displayed above, please let me know. I know I didn't include all the possible headers, but instead followed the lead set by Josh's implementation for ListStar. John John Buckman <(suppressed)@shelby.com> Shelby Group Ltd. http://www.shelby.com Developers of Lyris Email List Server ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Oct 1997 03:21:20 -0400 From: Mikael Hansen <(suppressed)@dnai.com> Subject: Re: Lyris supports List- headers now At 21:57 -0800 20/10/1997, John Buckman wrote: >I've added direct support the list headers into the Lyris List Server >program. This has been added as the default option for all Lyris >mailing lists, and is a yes/no option that the list admin can choose. Yes/no for all versus none or on a per list header basis? (AutoShare allows configuration of either.) - -- Mikael Hansen ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Oct 1997 17:43:06 -0400 From: "John Buckman" <(suppressed)@shelby.com> Subject: Re: Lyris supports List- headers now > At 21:57 -0800 20/10/1997, John Buckman wrote: > > >I've added direct support the list headers into the Lyris List Server > >program. This has been added as the default option for all Lyris > >mailing lists, and is a yes/no option that the list admin can choose. > > Yes/no for all versus none or on a per list header basis? > (AutoShare allows configuration of either.) It's a yes/no for the whole thing, and then, if people want to remove specific headers within the group, they can specify those to remove, by specifying the header "keys" for removal. Or, you can just say "no" and put them in yourself. PS: I'm starting to get some strongly negative feedback about these headers from the "Rhapsody" (the Apple OS) list. What has been the user reaction for other people on this mailing list who have implemented the list headers? Has anyone received positive feedback? John John Buckman <(suppressed)@shelby.com> Shelby Group Ltd. http://www.shelby.com Developers of Lyris Email List Server ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Oct 1997 19:53:34 -0400 From: Grant Neufeld <(suppressed)@achilles.net> Subject: complaints about headers (was: Lyris supports List- headers now) At 6:42 PM -0400 10/21/97, John Buckman wrote: >PS: I'm starting to get some strongly negative feedback about these >headers from the "Rhapsody" (the Apple OS) list. What is the negative feedback you've received? Which email clients are they using? Have you had complaints about any other aspects of your headers? I haven't had any complaints on the lists I host (but then, they're not big lists - and I certainly wouldn't expect complaints about using the headers on this list ;-). - -- grant@achilles.net grant@kagi.com http://arpp.carleton.ca/ O- <*> I accept MIME PGP: 4077 8306 9115 94B0 CEA6 F4F4 3B9A 9482 D158 7B9A ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Oct 1997 20:32:11 -0400 From: Will Mayall <(suppressed)@fogcity.com> Subject: Re: complaints about headers On 10/21/97 4:54 PM, Grant Neufeld wrote: >What is the negative feedback you've received? Which email clients are they >using? Have you had complaints about any other aspects of your headers? We've had complaints from users of LetterRip and we added an option to not include the headers. The complaints seem to originate with users of Eudora. I guess Eudora by default displays all the List headers. The general complaint is that people view the List-Software header as an advertisement. Once they understand that the headers were not intended to be displayed by email clients and are supposed to make life easier, they tend to be somewhat appeased. Will ____________________________________________________________________ Will Mayall http://www.fogcity.com President, Fog City Software ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Oct 1997 21:01:33 -0400 From: Hunter Goatley <(suppressed)@process.com> Subject: Re: complaints about headers Will Mayall <(suppressed)@fogcity.com> writes: > >The general complaint is that people view the List-Software header as an >advertisement. Once they understand that the headers were not intended to >be displayed by email clients and are supposed to make life easier, they >tend to be somewhat appeased. > That's why I just included the 3 headers List-Subscribe, List-Unsubscribe, and List-Help. I've had no complaints from the couple of thousand subscribers on my list. I do find the additional headers (beyond those three) somewhat obnoxious, since they're not hidden in my reader either. Hunter - ------ Hunter Goatley, Process Software, http://www.process.com/ MultiNet & TCPware: The Best TCP/IP for OpenVMS <(suppressed)@PROCESS.COM> http://www.madgoat.com/hunter.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Oct 1997 21:09:44 -0400 From: Grant Neufeld <(suppressed)@achilles.net> Subject: Re: complaints about headers At 8:31 PM -0400 10/21/97, Will Mayall wrote: >The complaints seem to originate with users of Eudora. I guess Eudora by >default displays all the List headers. That's fairly easy to fix once you know what the headers are. The "Boring Headers" in the Eudora settings dialog allows you to turn off any headers you don't want to see. Perhaps Qualcomm will add some of the list headers in use (like list-software). >The general complaint is that people view the List-Software header as an >advertisement. Which is part of why it's not included in the formal proposal. It's something list software developers want, but the end user gains nothing from it. If it was used to determine the command set, then it would be useful. - -- grant@achilles.net grant@kagi.com http://arpp.carleton.ca/ O- <*> A phrase I saw used to describe a massive quantity: "more common than Internet Explorer security bugs" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Oct 1997 21:34:49 -0400 From: Will Mayall <(suppressed)@fogcity.com> Subject: Re: complaints about headers On 10/21/97 6:10 PM, Grant Neufeld wrote: >>The general complaint is that people view the List-Software header as an >>advertisement. > >Which is part of why it's not included in the formal proposal. It's >something list software developers want, but the end user gains nothing >from it. If it was used to determine the command set, then it would be >useful. The end users generally will gain little from the List-Software header, but it can be useful when tracking down server issues. We include the version number in the header. This can help us and the list administrator when tracking down problems. Of course it also let's folks on our lists find out what our latest development version is. :-) Will ____________________________________________________________________ Will Mayall http://www.fogcity.com President, Fog City Software ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Oct 1997 22:16:40 -0400 From: Mikael Hansen <(suppressed)@dnai.com> Subject: Re: complaints about headers At 17:31 -0700 21/10/1997, Will Mayall wrote: >The general complaint is that people view the List-Software header as an >advertisement. How about inserting the List-Software header as not the *first*, but rather the *last* X-List header (as AutoShare does)? The former somewhat justifies the view of these people. - -- Mikael Hansen ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 21 Oct 1997 23:12:43 -0400 From: Grant Neufeld <(suppressed)@achilles.net> Subject: enhanced mailto URLs draft status I just got word from Paul Hoffman that they've submitted a -02 draft of the draft-hoffman-mailto-url-01.txt internet-draft describing the enhanced mailto URL syntax. It'll probably be at least a month before it can RFC (assuming there's no serious controversy). So, we're waiting on that before we can RFC the list- headers draft. An interesting note about the new mailto draft: >it has a fairly significant change: it allows multiple >addresses. - -- "Don't blame me - I'm a parasite." grant@achilles.net grant@kagi.com http://arpp.carleton.ca/ O- <*> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 22 Oct 1997 15:48:01 -0400 From: "Avi Rappoport" <(suppressed)@starnine.com> Subject: RE: Lyris supports List- headers now _______________________________________________________________________________ > From: list-header@arpp.carleton.ca on Tue, Oct 21, 1997 3:10 PM > Subject: Re: Lyris supports List- headers now > To: list-header@arpp.carleton.ca > >> At 21:57 -0800 20/10/1997, John Buckman wrote: >> >> >I've added direct support the list headers into the Lyris List Server >> >program. This has been added as the default option for all Lyris >> >mailing lists, and is a yes/no option that the list admin can choose. >> >> Yes/no for all versus none or on a per list header basis? >> (AutoShare allows configuration of either.) > > It's a yes/no for the whole thing, and then, if people want to remove > specific headers within the group, they can specify those to remove, by > specifying the header "keys" for removal. Or, you can just say "no" and > put them in yourself. > > PS: I'm starting to get some strongly negative feedback about these > headers from the "Rhapsody" (the Apple OS) list. > > What has been the user reaction for other people on this mailing list > who have implemented the list headers? Has anyone received positive > feedback? > > John I read the Rhapsody list in Eudora at home, and I can't find the option to turn it off. So I agree, it is an "in your face" sort of thing. Avi ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 22 Oct 1997 16:30:17 -0400 From: "Kent S. Larsen II" <(suppressed)@panix.com> Subject: Re: Lyris supports List- headers now At 2:42 PM -0800 10/21/97, John Buckman wrote: > >What has been the user reaction for other people on this mailing list >who have implemented the list headers? Has anyone received positive >feedback? > >John > >John Buckman <(suppressed)@shelby.com> >Shelby Group Ltd. http://www.shelby.com >Developers of Lyris Email List Server No reaction whatsoever from people on my lists. I don't think they have even noticed the headers (I have just a few thousand people spread over about 6 lists - the lists are not computer related and probably most people are clueless about computers - its amazing they can even subscribe themselves). I think the usefulness of these headers will come when email software supports buttons and other easy ways to use them. Kent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 22 Oct 1997 21:34:59 -0400 From: "John Buckman" <(suppressed)@shelby.com> Subject: RE: Lyris supports List- headers now > I read the Rhapsody list in Eudora at home, and I can't find the option to > turn it off. So I agree, it is an "in your face" sort of thing. The way we implemented the List Headers, it is up to the list admin to turn it on or off for the whole list. We could allow people to turn it on/off for themselves, but the efficiency cost of this option on large lists (say, 100,000 users) would be significant. On most lists there is always *somebody* who doesn't like the way the list is configured, and wants to have their opinion heard. For example, people love to argue about what the From: and the To: headers of list mail should say. I think the List-Headers are just another thing for people to feel religious about. In the final analysis, I see make it all configurable by the list admin, and let them set the law of the list. Also, we've found that users react very negatively to being asked to make a decision about something they don't understand, so we'd rather leave this option in the hands of the list admin, and not force users to decide what kind of List-Headers they want (how many of you fully understand the various header options in LISTSERV?). The general complaint about the List-Headers tends to be "Help! The headers are taking over the message!". A suprising number of people see the message headers of the mail they get. John John Buckman <(suppressed)@shelby.com> Shelby Group Ltd. http://www.shelby.com Developers of Lyris Email List Server ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 23 Oct 1997 04:55:03 -0400 From: James Berriman <(suppressed)@frutiger.staffs.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Lyris supports List- headers now At 03:33 23/10/97, John Buckman wrote: >The general complaint about the List-Headers tends to be "Help! The >headers are taking over the message!". A suprising number of people see >the message headers of the mail they get. Some mailers won't hide headers they don't recognise, which is arguably a 'good thing'. I know of many people here using Eudora 1.5.4 who probably won't bother upgrading until something breaks ;-) Is there an up-to-date list of clients/helpers that _can_ handle list headers? ( :-]) James ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 27 Oct 1997 00:52:29 -0500 From: "Joshua D. Baer" <(suppressed)@skyweyr.com> Subject: Re: Re: complaints about headers I found a bunch of messages I had written were rejected, but I didn't notice, so I'm reposting them here. Sorry! - ---------------------------------------------------- At 9:17 PM -0500 10/21/97, Mikael Hansen wrote: > At 17:31 -0700 21/10/1997, Will Mayall wrote: > > >The general complaint is that people view the List-Software header as an > >advertisement. > > How about inserting the List-Software header as not the *first*, but rather > the *last* X-List header (as AutoShare does)? The former somewhat justifies > the view of these people. No one is supposed to see the headers at all unless they are specifically looking for them. I really don't think the order is very important, but if it belongs anywhere, it is at the top. Order doesn't matter at all to computers, but it does to people. If a person is using the headers, the only thing you might want to show them before List-Software is List-Unsubscribe. ~Josh - ---------------------------------------------------- At 7:31 PM -0500 10/21/97, Will Mayall wrote: > The general complaint is that people view the List-Software header as an > advertisement. Once they understand that the headers were not intended to > be displayed by email clients and are supposed to make life easier, they > tend to be somewhat appeased. That's my experience as well. If anyone does complain, once I explain what the headers are for they all have been satisfied. Maybe we should add an X-Planation field to the proposal... ;-) ~Josh At 8:10 PM -0500 10/21/97, Grant Neufeld wrote: > >The general complaint is that people view the List-Software header as an > >advertisement. > > Which is part of why it's not included in the formal proposal. It's > something list software developers want, but the end user gains nothing > from it. If it was used to determine the command set, then it would be > useful. I wouldn't call it useless. I think there is some value to the user (I have found myself looking for it to find out what software a list is running) and other non-standard headers already in use that it could standardize (X-ListProcessor, X-Listserver, etc.). I'm not saying it's some magic wonder, but it's not all bad. ~Josh - ---------------------------------------------------- At 2:22 AM -0500 10/21/97, Mikael Hansen wrote: > At 21:57 -0800 20/10/1997, John Buckman wrote: > > >I've added direct support the list headers into the Lyris List Server > >program. This has been added as the default option for all Lyris > >mailing lists, and is a yes/no option that the list admin can choose. > > Yes/no for all versus none or on a per list header basis? > (AutoShare allows configuration of either.) You could always (and can still) add them individually. ~Josh - ---------------------------------------------------- At 5:42 PM -0500 10/21/97, John Buckman wrote: > PS: I'm starting to get some strongly negative feedback about these > headers from the "Rhapsody" (the Apple OS) list. > > What has been the user reaction for other people on this mailing list > who have implemented the list headers? Has anyone received positive > feedback? Yes, both my list owners and list users have responded positively. Some complain about seeing extra headers, but most agree that the value of having the instructions present in every message is overwhelming. ~Josh - -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Joshua D. Baer SkyWeyr Technologies Psssssst... check this out! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 28 Oct 1997 16:41:28 -0500 From: Christopher Allen <(suppressed)@consensus.com> Subject: Re: complaints about headers At 4:31 PM -0800 10/21/97, Will Mayall wrote: >The complaints seem to originate with users of Eudora. I guess Eudora by >default displays all the List headers. And it is in Eudora that it is the easiest to hide these headers (behind the "blah-blah-blah" icon) -- however, it is requires the "Boring Headers" settings file that does not come with the standard Eudora. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ .. ** NOTE NEW OFFICE ADDRESS & PHONE NUMBER ** .. .. Christopher Allen Consensus Development Corporation .. .. President & CTO 2930 Shattuck Ave. #206 .. .. <(suppressed)@consensus.com> Berkeley, CA 94705-1883 .. .. o510/649-3300 f510/649-3301 .. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 29 Oct 1997 12:39:37 -0500 From: "Clarence C. Wong" <(suppressed)@qualcomm.com> Subject: Re: complaints about headers At 12:41 PM -0800 10/28/1997, Christopher Allen wrote: >At 4:31 PM -0800 10/21/97, Will Mayall wrote: >>The complaints seem to originate with users of Eudora. I guess Eudora by >>default displays all the List headers. > >And it is in Eudora that it is the easiest to hide these headers (behind >the "blah-blah-blah" icon) -- however, it is requires the "Boring Headers" >settings file that does not come with the standard Eudora. > Is the list software using X-list headers or List- headers? X-list headers are included in the Boring Headers list by default. You can fetch the Mac settings plug-in from here: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 29 Oct 1997 12:59:43 -0500 From: Will Mayall <(suppressed)@fogcity.com> Subject: Re: complaints about headers On 10/28/97 7:04 PM, Clarence C. Wong wrote: >Is the list software using X-list headers or List- headers? X-list headers >are included in the Boring Headers list by default. LetterRip is using the List- headers which are the final standard. I believe other mailing list servers have also switched over to using these headers. Perhaps it would be a good idea to include the List- headers in Eudora's default for Boring Headers. Will ____________________________________________________________________ Will Mayall http://www.fogcity.com President, Fog City Software ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 29 Oct 1997 14:35:41 -0500 From: "Bob Hartman" <(suppressed)@esoft.com> Subject: Re: complaints about headers On 29 Oct 97 at 9:58, Will Mayall wrote: > LetterRip is using the List- headers which are the final standard. I > believe other mailing list servers have also switched over to using these > headers. It is the final standard, but has it been approved yet? I thought we were still waiting for final approval and until then things had to use the X-List versions. ============== Bob Hartman ----====+====---- eSoft, Inc. ============== bob.hartman@esoft.com Voice: (303)699-6565 BBS: (303)699-8222 Setting up an Internet presence shouldn't fray your nerves. Point your web browser to http://www.esoft.com and find out how eSoft's Internet Protocol Adapter (IPAD) can put your business on the Internet quickly and easily. Put the power of the Internet into your business! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 29 Oct 1997 15:17:22 -0500 From: Christopher Allen <(suppressed)@consensus.com> Subject: Re: "Boring Headers" At 10:21 AM -0800 10/29/97, Michele Fuortes wrote: >>And it is in Eudora that it is the easiest to hide these headers (behind >>the "blah-blah-blah" icon) -- however, it is requires the "Boring Headers" >>settings file that does not come with the standard Eudora. > >where can you find that setting file? >Altavista, qualcomm don't seem to find it. I can't seem to find it either -- however, if you are using a mac, and have a resource editor, in your "settings" file you'll find a STR# resource number 3200, that contains a list of the headers to exclude from view by default. Just add "x-list-" and "list-" to the bottom and none of these headers will be displayed unless you click on the "blah-blah-blah" icon. Alternatively, you can also list all of the headers except for "x-list-unsubscribe" and "list-unsubscribe" separately, and then only that one header will show up. This is what I do. BTW, the default header exclusion list in STR# 3200 appears to be: received message resent-message in-reply references return x400 mail-system x-envelope x-vms x-ph content- x-char x-uidl x-mailer p1- ua- original-encoded errors-to delivery- disposition x-listserver mime-version precedence - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ .. ** NOTE NEW OFFICE ADDRESS & PHONE NUMBER ** .. .. Christopher Allen Consensus Development Corporation .. .. President & CTO 2930 Shattuck Ave. #206 .. .. <(suppressed)@consensus.com> Berkeley, CA 94705-1883 .. .. o510/649-3300 f510/649-3301 .. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 29 Oct 1997 16:44:42 -0500 From: Will Mayall <(suppressed)@fogcity.com> Subject: Re: complaints about headers On 10/29/97 11:42 AM, Bob Hartman wrote: >> LetterRip is using the List- headers which are the final standard. I >> believe other mailing list servers have also switched over to using these >> headers. > >It is the final standard, but has it been approved yet? I thought we were >still waiting for final approval and until then things had to use the X-List >versions. I have not checked on the process recently but I don't think it has been approved. I'd expect it to take some time getting approval. In the meantime, there should be no problem using the headers as proposed in the final proposal (other than their display in some email clients). I'd guess that the earlier mailing list server software adds the headers, the earlier email clients will take advantage of them. Will ____________________________________________________________________ Will Mayall http://www.fogcity.com President, Fog City Software ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 29 Oct 1997 17:49:47 -0500 From: Keith Moore <(suppressed)@cs.utk.edu> Subject: Re: complaints about headers > > LetterRip is using the List- headers which are the final standard. I > > believe other mailing list servers have also switched over to using these > > headers. > > It is the final standard, but has it been approved yet? I thought we were > still waiting for final approval and until then things had to use the X-List > versions. It's still waiting for approval (actually, it's waiting on the URL syntax document to be approved). The List-* names are unlikely to be assigned to other purposes, but it's always (remotely) possible that there will be reasonable Last Call objections to one or more of those headers, which will require a syntax change to fix. In other words, I wouldn't ship code that uses List-* headers just yet. URL syntax should be Last Called soon, and we'll probably Last Call the List-* document at the same time. Keith ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 29 Oct 1997 18:21:36 -0500 From: "Kent S. Larsen II" <(suppressed)@panix.com> Subject: Re: "Boring Headers" I don't find them boring at all! I think they're scintillating! [sorry, I couldn't resist!] Kent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 31 Oct 1997 01:25:08 -0500 From: Dave Crocker <(suppressed)@brandenburg.com> Subject: Re: complaints about headers At 10/22/97, Will Mayall wrote: >The complaints seem to originate with users of Eudora. I guess Eudora by >default displays all the List headers. Folks, does anyone sense some irony, here? We WANT those headers to be seen. �Hiding them exactly defeats their purpose. �If you hide them, then users need to know how to unhide them, in order to find out how to unsubscribe. �That's too much work and it would need to be done by exactly the portion of the user population which is least likely to know that it should be done (i.e., that the headers are there) or how to do it. Some irony to all this is that we are all highly tolerant of the signature lines at the end of everyone's messages. �I guess it's ok to waste space one way but not another... In other words, I suspect the real problem here is failure to understand the social benefit, as well as the need for email user software to learn the new headers. People don't complain about Received headers all that much, these days... d/ - -------------------- Dave Crocker +1 408 246 8253 Brandenburg Consulting fax: +1 408 249 6205 675 Spruce Dr. dcrocker@brandenburg.com Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA http://www.brandenburg.com Internet Mail Consortium info@imc.org, http://www.imc.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 31 Oct 1997 08:51:26 -0500 From: Grant Neufeld <(suppressed)@achilles.net> Subject: [admin] arpp.carleton.ca service disruption The arpp.carleton.ca server will be experiencing a service disruption starting sometime tomorrow (Saturday, November 1), since I'm moving to a new city. It may be unavailable or sporadically unavailable until some time in the next week. I'll send out a notice when things have stabilized. (or maybe I should say 'if' they stabilize...) - -- grant@acm.org grant@kagi.com http://arpp.carleton.ca/ O- <*> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 31 Oct 1997 12:02:48 -0500 From: "Clarence C. Wong" <(suppressed)@qualcomm.com> Subject: Re: complaints about headers At 2:58 PM +0900 10/31/1997, Dave Crocker wrote: >We WANT those headers to be seen. Hiding them exactly defeats their >purpose. Agreed. Until e-mail software provides a more friendly UI for these headers, they should remain visible by default. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Digest