From: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Date: Tue, 7 May 1996 13:42:22 +0800
To: stewarts@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: A MODEST PROPOSAL (fwd)
Message-ID: <01I4E2XUW8RC8Y583T@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


From:	IN%"stewarts@ix.netcom.com"  "Bill Stewart"  5-MAY-1996 03:53:29.33

>I think that's user-settable, but there is no ideal approach.

	I certainly hope it's user-settable, and settable by each mailing
list.

>The big advantage is that replies go to the original sender by default 
>rather than to the list (which reduces the amount of personal mail going
>to the list, winning both on noise-reduction and embarassment-reduction);

	That's what I suspected the reason was. Sort of like having mail
instead of post as a default in USENET.

>the disadvantage is that bouncemail goes to the original sender, rather
>than the list or the list-manager (bouncemail to the sender is annoying, 
>but minor; bouncemail to the list is extremely annoying, as well as 
>potentially causing mail loops, which are an extreme lossage.  Bouncemail
>to the list-manager is ideal (not that the list-manager usually reads it),
>but it's hard to get without reducing replies directly to originators,
>as well as increasing replies accidentally going to the list-manager.

	I've been looking into procmail as a mail filtering mechanism for a
list. It appears possible to handle at least some of the bouncemail via
sending it to the list-manager (looking for things like priority:
list/bulk/junk, for instance). Any further suggestions?
	Incidentally, I've been having problems locating the list-manager
guides for majordomo; yes, I've tried Alta Vista. All I seem to be able to
locate are A. the guides for users - not much use; and B. the FAQ. Sameer?
	-Allen