[plug] Dealing with cluelessness.

[Mike]

At 10:40 AM 27/3/2001 +0800, you wrote:
>why not just add the footer as already mentioned.
>works for most lists

Sorry to say it doesn't - especially for the larger ones, I am on
12 lists now, many with footers and there are still some unsub
requests sent - most people fortunately ignore them and thats
probably what the smarter people on this list should do ;-)

I accept your point though, if the list were smaller then it
may be of some help, generally on larger lists where there is
a greater subscription exposure - it doesn't work.

Rgds

mike




>my 2 cents worth!
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: The Thought Assassin <assassin at live.wasp.net.au>
>To: <plug at plug.linux.org.au>
>Sent: Monday, March 26, 2001 10:37 AM
>Subject: [plug] Dealing with cluelessness.
>
>
>> I can't keep track of all the subthreads any more, so I'm starting my own.
>>
>> The problem: unsubscribe attempts going to the list, not the listbot.
>> The solution: Send new subscribers an email explaining unsubscription.
>>
>> This works on 90% of cases.
>>
>> The problem: Idiots not reading the instructions they have been sent.
>> The solution: ???
>> Suggestions so far:
>>
>> 1: Send the instructions again.
>> Problem: These people don't read instructions. It doesn't matter if they
>> are sent at the end of every message, at the end of some messages, or not
>> at all. We are dealing with people who do not read instructions in the
>> first place, so placing instructions somewhere they shouldn't even expect
>> instructions to be is a waste of bandwidth.
>>
>> 2: Change the instructions to meet the idiot's interpretation.
>> Problem: Like spam or porn filtering, you can't distinguish automatically
>> with any accuracy. You either fail to unsubscribe people who attempt it
>> wrongly (you can never anticipate the actions of idiots) or you manage to
>> unsubscribe people who do not wish to be unsubscribed, but haven't kept up
>> with the exact logic of the unsubscription filters. Usually, you have both
>> problems. The list is here to service its subscribers, not its attempted
>> unsubscribers, so the acceptable level of filtering is none at all.
>>
>> 3: Change the idiots.
>> Problem: How do you determine who is an idiot and who is not with a simple
>> test? Someone might prove capable of reading when given such a test, but
>> then choose not to read at future times, through laziness of ignorance. I
>> think this would have a small positive effect on our subscribership, but a
>> large negative effect on external perception of us.
>>
>> What are we left with?
>> I can see merits in combining all of the above methods to varying degrees,
>> but hopefully in ways to limit the negatives mentioned.
>>
>> Combining the first two approaches, how about a (conservative!) filter for
>> that results in sending the instructions again? Only this time, the
>> message is: "you have sent an email that looks like an unsubscribe
>> request. It was _not_ broadcast the list. Follow instruction X to
>> unsubscribe. Follow instruction Y to send your message to the list
>> anyway." Obviously, this should involve strong anti-looping logic. :)
>> Is this a good idea? It might potentially annoy list members who expect
>> in-band text to stay in-band, (do we allow them to set an option to
>> switch the filter off for their mail?) and will possibly create more work
>> for the poor overworked underpaid list-admin. What do we think?
>>
>> The way to modify the third method is to accept that a computer cannot
>> detect an idiot. We, on the other hand, can - since we define the term
>> "idiot" ourselves. :) When someone posts on the list in a manner that
>> implies an inability or unwillingness to read instructions, we must make
>> it clear to them that their behaviour is limiting the benefits of the list
>> for themselves and others. Point them in the direction of documentation,
>> if they don't know where it is. Explain what the docs mean when they are
>> obscure, and how they apply to the problem at hand. Ignore their pleas for
>> free tech support - this forum is for sharing the experiences of fellow
>> users, not for avoiding learning about your system - there are people whom
>> you can pay to do that. This is of course a generalisation; there are
>> many times when a question could be answered with an RTFM, but could be
>> answered better and more accurately with the wisdom of experience that a
>> list member might have. Where do we draw the line? Should we have a line?
>> Should we have guidelines in the FAQ? Should we just have an
>> understanding, as we (sort of) do now? Am I advocating an elitist police
>> state? Should we sign an extradition treaty with the PWUG, or just exile
>> offenders to /dev/null? Should I stop writing email and get back to work?
>> Answers in 12 words or less, on my desktop tomorrow morning, thanks.
>>
>> -Greg Mildenhall
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>