[plug] Return Receipt on List (was M$ wants you to pay & Mac to go OSS)

[Christian]

Since Bret's email program seems unable to do a sensible quotation on
replying, I've used a pseudo-HTML style to indicate who wrote what.

Bret Busby wrote:

<christian>
> Perhaps my understanding of the way receipting works is wrong (in which
> case tell me) however I can see a number of reasons why such a practice
> is uncalled for on a mailing list.  The first and most obvious reason is
> that it's blatantly totally unnecessary.  You know that the mail reached
> the mailing list because you're on the mailing list and will receive a
> copy!  You don't need to know when every member of the mailing list
> receives your email, in fact, many might regard it as an invasion of
> privacy for this to happen since it reveals (as I understand it) when
> they read the email, what their email address is and, of course, their
> presence on the list - naturally this isn't much of an issue on this
> list but there are some lists on which it is.
</christian>
<bret>
> Strange; it hadn't occurred to me that paranoia was an issue within PLUG.
> Whilst it is interesting to see the variety of the subscribers, the variety,
> and the identities (providing they aren't wearing masks), of the
> subscribers, appear to be revealed to a great extent, in the messages
> published, and espionage is not my intent. I leave that to professionals,
> like Intel and Microsoft, and the police cameras, and the Internet
> regulators, etc...
</bret>

"Paranoia" isn't an issue in PLUG - I just said it wasn't - which part
of "naturally this isn't much of an issue on this list" don't you
understand?  Perhaps you should try re-reading what I wrote?   I notice
you make no comment on the statement I make that there is simply no
point to receipting on a mailing list - I suspect this is due to the
blatant and obvious truth of this.

<christian>
> It's also irritating to
> have my mail client ask me continually if I want to send a return
> receipt to every email that I receive from you - especially since as
> I've pointed out it's totally unnecessary.
</christian>

<bret>
> What a strange email application. It doesn't happen with my email
> application, and I am not aware of it happening with may others. It appears,
> that it happens with Eudora. I understood that a user could disable email
> receipting, or, enable it, for all email received by the user. Does your
> email application not have this facility?
</bret>

The fact that it doesn't happen with your email client doesn't make
everyone else's client "strange".  I don't know about Eudora (I don't
use it - esp. since I virtually never use Windows) but in Communicator
there's an option to set it to return receipts automatically or to
prompt.  I've set it to prompt because there are certain times that I
perhaps don't want a return receipt sent - especially since they're so
rarely used... *cough*  I just don't expect to have people requesting
receipts from 100+ people on a mailing list - it seems a really stupid
thing to do!

> Am I supposed to take responsibility for the problems that users encounter,
> through their choice of email application?

The problem is not the choice of everyone else's email client, but your
moronic behaviour.  And, yes, you are supposed to take a certain degree
of responsibility.  For example, when you're on a mailing list it's not
good to send HTML-encoded mail for the obvious reasons that not everyone
can read it.  Similar basic courtesy rules apply here - which you don't
seem to understand.

<christian>
> I would also have thought
> that in most cases that you wouldn't want to receive a return receipt
> from every member of a mailing list when you post (and I think you
> posted three or four times today!
</christian>
<bret>
> As I explained, previously, I had just begun responding to some of the
> messages, after a break. And, out of the three hundred odd messages that I
> had received, four responses, surely, is not excessive, is it?
</bret>

That merely means that the other 100+ people either had their email
clients set to not return receipts (probably a very small percentage) or
when their email client prompted them, they said "no".  But why should
100+ people have to choose "No" for you? Wouldn't it be much more
efficient for you to set your list emails not to request receipts? 
Also, try and understand this: either 100+ people are selecting "No" or
everyone has their clients set to not automatically not return receipts
- it's quite irrelevant which (except for the additional inconvenience,
which I assume you don't INTEND to cause) so, WHY REQUEST THE RECEIPTS
IN THE FIRST PLACE???

<christian>
> I think they're over 100 people on
> PLUG so that's 400 emails that are just pointless receipts...).
> Obviously it's a waste and, as I've pointed out, totally unnecessary.
</christian>
<bret>
> Does this mean that, if I only get about half a dozen receipts for each
> message that I put up, as I have done in the past, that only half a dozen
> people of all the subscribers to the mailing list, have mail accounts? So
> far, I have received about six receipts, in total, for the messages that I
> posted today. Does that mean that all the other subscribers' copies of the
> message got lost?
</bret>

What do you think?  Do you think it got lost?  Does it really matter if
they did? (you don't know most of the people anyway - you weren't
sending the email specifically to them).  Besides, as I said above, if
you get such a poor percentage of receipts being sent (luckily for you)
WHY DO YOU BOTHER SENDING THEM?

<christian>
> You seem to be under the impression that return receipting causes some
> problem for Linux - I don't think so (although I'm not sure if it's a
> standard feature - someone else doubtless knows) and this is certainly
> not the issue.
</christian>
<bret>
> The only possible explanation is that some people are using some defective
> email application that runs on Linux, from what you have said in this
> particular email. In the previous email, you gave no explanation, so I had
> assumed that the receipting had caused the mailing list server to crash, or,
> do a Windows thing and kill itself, or something equally drastic.
</bret>

Of course.  Everyone else's email programs are defective.  Yours,
however, is just fine.  Let's all go out and get Microsoft Outlook.

<christian>
> You say that you use receipting because "some of the emails" you send to
> places other than the mailing list warrant it - wouldn't it make more
> sense to switch on receipting for these emails?
</christian>
<bret>
> Do you have most of your emails of low importance? Lately, most of my emails
> have been of high importance, and, what you appear to be saying, is that I
> should manually set the parameter on every other email, for the benefit of
> the few.
</bret>

Ok, it's your choice.  Either set it to default off and switch it on
when you need it (normal behaviour for virtually every email client I've
seen) or default it on and switch it off when you post here.

<christian>
> Anyway, I may have the whole concept of receipting totally wrong (in
> which case I'll be happy to have it explained to me) but I know for sure
> that despite being on a large number of lists of varying sizes for many
> years, your emails are the only ones on any list that I've ever
> encountered that have return receipts enabled.
</christian>
<bret>
> Similarly, as stated, this is the only mailing list from which I have
> received complaints. It is also interesting that, in the 8 or 9 years that I
> have been using email, I have not had this kind of complaint, or heard of
> this kind of problem, before these three complaints. I have been using the
> receipting for a couple of years, I believe, on multiple mailing lists, and
> have had no complaints, from anyone, except the three on this particular
> mailing list.
</bret>

I'm very surprised that you don't get inundated with receipts every time
you post to these lists.

<christian>
> This fact and my present
> understanding of return receipts suggests that they're totally
> unwarranted on a mailing list.  And also given the fact that a previous
> request on the list for you to switch them off wasn't from me, I suspect
> that I'm not the only one who thinks so.
</christian>
<bret>
> So far, out of the 100+ subscribers to the mailing list, I have received one
> message about this, prior to your message, as previously mentioned, and one
> message since.
</bret>

Well, a couple of people have said to me on IRC that they agree about
turning off the receipt requests.  I expect these people may also post
to the list to confirm what I've said.  Or maybe they'll just hope that
you've got the message by now.

> Given that the number of subscribers is over 100, that means that less than
> 3% of one destination for email from me, have a problem.

And it means 97% are either manually opting not to send a receipt or
they have it switched off - either way you don't get your receipt so why
bother?

> And, you insist that I change my procedure to suit only less than 35 of one
> of my email destinations?

I (and others) ask you to change your procedure before posting to this
list.  I would also suggest you stop inconveniencing people on the other
lists too - but that's up to you and them.

> If more users have defective email applications, and enough have them, then,
> perhaps, if I am advised by others of this, I can turn off the receipting
> for the PLUG mailing list emails for those poor unfortunates.

"Defective"?  What exactly is defective?  You mean, that we have our
clients set to prompt us before sending a receipt?  That's not defective
- most people who use Linux like to control what their computer does (in
many ways, that's the attraction).  They don't like their computers
doing things behind their backs.  I know my client could allow me to
switch it off, but I don't want to - except for you, I very rarely
receive receipt requests and I'd rather know when someone wants that
information before I decide either not to send the receipt or to send
the receipt.  I don't think this is particularly unusual.

> Once again, for those poor unfortunates, the receipting is turned off for
> their benefit.
> Hopefully, sometime, they will get real email applications, or, in the true
> spirit of Linux, reprogram their email applications, to overcome this bug.

You can't be serious???  You're using Microsoft Outlook and you're
suggesting that we're using "defective" mail clients?  I also noticed
the lovely way this "real" email program formatted your reply - I can't
see the Linux community being motivated to rush out and write an email
app that can't do a proper quoted reply.  Also, I'd hardly call the fact
that our email clients don't automatically send return receipts a
"bug".  Especially since this is configurable and most people would have
deliberately configured it this way due to the fact that MOST people
aren't as gratuitous in their use of receipts as you.

Here's a simplified recap of the possibilities here:
a)  Everyone has their clients set to automatically return the receipt
which means an email in your inbox for every post you make multiplied by
the number of people on the list. (probably about pointless 500 emails
in your box for today's effort - are you honestly telling me you are
interested in the receipts you receive from mailing list postings?)
OR
b)  Everyone has their clients set to prompt when returning a receipt -
so 100+ people have to type/click "No" which renders your receipt
requests pointless since you don't get your receipts)
OR
c)  Everyone has their clients set to not send a receipt - so you don't
get your receipts anyway which once again renders your receipt request
pointless.

Obviously, what really happens is a combination of these three things -
but the net result is the same.  Some people are inconvenienced, some
people are oblivious and others send their receipts which you then
ignore/discard.  SO WHY BOTHER ASKING FOR THEM???  Quite simply, all
this can be solved by you taking half a second more when you send an
email.  Or, it can be solved by everyone else changing their mail
clients configuration to way which doesn't make much sense.  To quote
yourself "Some few of us expect everyone else to change their worlds,
for our convenience."  Try and have a think about it.

Christian.

PS.  Apologies to everyone else on this list who's had to put up with
this.

-- 
========================================================================
I'm not trying to give users what they want, I'm trying to give them
freedom, which they can then accept or reject. If people don't want
freedom, they may be out of luck with me, but I won't allow them to 
define for me what is right, what is worth spending my life for.
                                                    - Richard Stallman