Folks,
As Graeme [1] notes, this mailing-list is primarily intended for real
discussions and help about Exim, not descending spirals of meta. Leave
that to USENET. Oh, what happened to USENET? Nevermind. [2]
Email is often a touchy subject, with so much financial incentive for
some to abuse, and many postmasters with sensitive scars from where
they've been burned in the past. Wounds are too easily opened. I don't
ask that folks tip-toe around what might be perceived as the problems of
others, but do ask for displays of respect when such problems are
encountered, to come to a productive conclusion, instead of a thread
which is effectively spam for most of the thousands of subscribers to
this mailing-list.
Like any help list, there will be times when a repetitive question is
met with "RTFM", which is understandable; given the size of Exim's fine
manual, missing something is also understandable, so "teach a man to
fish" answers which point both to the section in the manual and
appropriate search engine (or 'less(1)') instructions are even better
and less brusque. Even just "RTFM chapter on TLS, let us know if we can
improve the text about foo." is better than "RTFM".
There will be times when someone posts something which looks as though
it might be posted under false pretences. Using multiple names on
different lists to avoid attack is understandable, but spammers do the
same thing. So I happen to think that suspicion on the part of
responders is justifiable, until countered, and politeness is still most
appropriate. Once, everyone used the same email address everywhere.
Folks might notice that my posts here come from a couple of different
email addresses, depending on how "official" I'm being in my response,
and the address in my own domain-name is list-specific. I choose to
still post with the display-name matching my real name, that's my
choice.
In the most recent case, the poster has been active on this mailing-list
in the past, asking on-topic questions. I recognised the name, so was
surprised when the multiple aliases were noted. The behaviour certainly
raised my cynical postmaster hackles, but because I recognised the name
as previously okay [4] I didn't skip reading the thread and _because_ of
the OP's previous postings, I read far enough to read his explanation.
Without those, I might not have bothered.
With that explanation, I would have hoped that the experienced mail
admins on this list would have spotted that the trigger for their
responses was a false alarm, and settled down. Alas, matters had
already progressed to a spiralling escalation. Please folks, consider
carefully how you respond. Responding off-list to avoid spamming folks
is good, but doing so in a tone which comes across as "hostile, and
hiding it from public view" is an approach which, I had to learn the
hard way (repeatedly, years ago), is a mistake.
So I happen to believe that what happened in the recent thread was
natural, from both sides, but I also think it was avoidable if folks
behaved as "Internet adults". People who have enough experience of
online discourse to spot the impact of their actions on others, intended
or not, and to take responsibility for it, working to cooperate for the
benefit of the list as a whole.
If you care about how mistakes happen in communication and improving
your own ability to respond, that recent thread "Bulk Outbound
Performance" is worth going back to read, looking not at the technical
issues but the interpersonal dynamics, what went right and what went
wrong, and looking at your own behaviour to determine if any of the
lessons are applicable to you. Because it could so easily have been
someone else inciting things. On a bad day, it might even still have
been me, which would disappoint me when I calmed down.
For the future: please try to remember to find ways to help each other
in a constructive way. Behave like states(wo)men, not like politicians.
Regards, and peace out,
- -Phil
[1] *cough*, not "Graham", but some parents are cruel[3] so mistakes by
those who can't copy and paste are understandable.
[2] This footnote exists to make the footnotes more like an homage to
USENET.
[3] Graeme, please feel free to extract wergeld in beer the next time we
meet in person. :)
[4] This leads into reputation systems, and the advantage of a
consistent identifier which can be used for tracking reputation,
whether algorithmic or the natural classifications subconsciously
done by every human being, which worked well right up until
many-to-many communication happened on the Internet without a face
to tie the communications to. My insult in [1] above is in part
something I hope to get away with because Graeme and I have met in
person. Er, and [3] might not hurt my chances.
