Hi John et al,
I would be very wary of using [log in to unmask] as the reply-to
address. Is there not a danger of a recurring loop with "Vaccation"
programs? In the past, when posting to the list I have always had a
number of replies from subscribers of the sort of "out-of-office"
variety. If these were sent to [log in to unmask], wouldn't they then
be sent back out to every user, including the accounts with the
automated replies - causing a loop. I seem to remember something like
this happening 2 years ago when >4500 emails got sent out to everyone on
the list in <15 minutes.
I may be wrong, but just a cautionary note.
Regards,
Mark
John Ashburner wrote:
>> some time back the general setting of email sent to the SPM mailing list
>> were changed to include an [SPM] tag in the subject line. This really
>> improved spam filtering a lot.
>>
>
> This setting is one that users specify themselves
> (seehttp://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm). I simply took the
> liberty of changing everyones settings. More recent subscribers will not
> have an [SPM] tag in the subject line of their emails.
>
>
>> I wonder how the community feels about another change. I often encounter
>> the situation that I read an interesting question on the mailing list, but
>> it is never answered on the mailing list. I assume that not all these
>> emails remain unanswered, but rather that the experts answering these
>> questions hit the 'Reply'-Button in their email client and the response
>> goes directly to the person's personal mail account from which the question
>> was posted.
>>
>
> I suspect that people actually choose who they send their replies to. If this
> was suddenly changed, then there will be a lot more private stuff exposed on
> the list. I guess this would make the list a bit more interesting.
>
>
>> My suggestion would be to change the Reply-To field of all incoming emails
>> automatically to [log in to unmask], thus insuring that response end up on
>> the mailing list so that other interested people can read them as well.
>>
>
> I'm not exactly sure how this would be done. I've had a quick look through
> the documentation at JISCMail and don't see any options that would allow the
> lists to be configured this way.
>
> Best regards,
> -John
>
|