[Mailman-Users] query re "message has implicit destination"(devils advocate!)

[Bretton Vine]

Steve Burling said the following on 2006/08/31 07:55 PM:
> Could we maybe leave this poor dead horse to rest in peace?

Only if I get a last word in edgewise :-)

> Apparently, many of the posters to this list believe (with some 
> justification, imho) that it should take explicit action to undo safe 
> defaults, rather than requiring explicit action to set safe values.  You 
> disagree.  You've made that abundantly clear.  Fine.  We believe that you 
> disagree.

Then you've misunderstood me. I don't disagree, and since turning the
setting off have seen an immediate *and* significant increase in the amount
of spam getting to open lists which answers a question I raised earlier.

The point I was illustrating is that if you have to justify the rationale
behind a default setting to a third-party-decision-maker -- what is the most
appropriate and concise response?

> But based on my (rather more than I care to contemplate) years in this 
> business, I think you're wrong.

I may well be. However I dispute the reasoning that things are done a
certain way 'just because that's the way they're done'. This thread has
resulted in far more knowledge than I need convey on to my boss/clients, but
it has been immensely useful too. Both in terms of my learning, and
proposing alternate perspectives. Just because I present a point-of-view
doesn't mean I agree with it. Nor does it invalidate it.

I've heard arguments from developers critical of third parties modifying the
software in a particular way and then failing to support it accordingly.
I've heard arguments that the developers know what's best. I've questioned
whether these approaches are based on developer-need, user-input or pure
reasoning. I don't believe I've done anything a curious individual could be
faulted for, nor do I see any evidence that people willing to take a
moment's pause for a reasoned response reacting uncomfortably or being
unwilling to share their experience or philosophy-of-approach.

In closing, I needed a simple answer. I couldn't find one myself, so I
asked. In return I learned far more than I requested, and developed an
immediate respect for those who understood where I was coming from.
In time perhaps those who endured irritation will understand. :-)

-- 
| Bretton Vine | 083 633 8475 | bretton at hivemind.net |
| GPG: http://bretton.hivemind.net/bretton_vine.asc  |

"All progress is based upon a universal innate desire on the part of every
organism to live beyond its income." — Samuel Butler (1835-1902),British writer.