minor list changes

[Gordon JC Pearce]

Jay West wrote:

> 2) I changed the max time in queue for any message (outbound) to 35 
> minutes. This means the server will try to send email to you once, then 
> again 30 minutes later, and then it will just give up on you. It won't 
> unsubscribe you at that point, it takes like 7 days of bounces to get 
> you unsubbed. But it won't try to send you any given list post more than 
> twice now. Same reason as above.

My 2p-worth on it, which you may not want to hear from a relative newcomer.

BUT - and it's a big but, so let's say it again - BUT!

Do any of us pay for this mailing list?
I personally don't.  I think that Jay does a great job under difficult 
conditions - particularly the last month, which by the sound of it has 
mostly been firefighting - and we should all be grateful there's a list 
at all.

How often do you have as much as half an hour's downtime?  I personally 
think the timeout should be longer, perhaps four hours or so.  I can 
understand the arguments for short and the arguments for long.  I've run 
plenty of mail servers, fixed more than a few others, and even written 
one (long since dead, thank goodness - it was utter shite and I am 
embarrassed to even look for the disks these days).

If I have a period of lossage greater than half an hour, then I will go 
and check if I'm still subscribed.  If not, I'll just resubscribe, and 
check the archives in my Copious Free Time.  Maybe I'll even post a mail 
to the list saying "I was unsubbed for a while there, did anyone say 
anything relevant to me?"

If this happens often enough that resubbing becomes a nuisance, then I 
will consider subscribing with a more reliable email address.  I have 
masses of Gmail invites.  Please feel free to ask if you want one.

As I say, just my thoughts on it.

Gordon JC Pearce.