gjm@packard.UUCP (Gary J. Murakami) (04/18/86)
In article <692@hoptoad.uucp> gnu@hoptoad.UUCP writes: >mistakes that give me information or market share... (I can see the >scramble as companies implement mail-checkers to look for info in their >uucp traffic. Maybe that's why AT&T is sponsoring ihnp4...) I set up ihnp4 to support electronic mail for AT&T and friends since there is a lot of communication between AT&T and other companies, universities, consultants, suppliers, clients, and friends. There is also a significant amount of traffic that ihnp4 forwards which is totally unrelated to AT&T. However I consider this to be some of the best PR that AT&T could ever support (I'm not sure how much longer it will last). Back on the subject: years ago before HDB UUCP, I used to try to read the dead mail in the UUCP spool in often futile attempts to return the failures to the sender with suggestions for retrying (silly me for trying to be too nice). Needless to say, that was a long time ago. Automated tools and finally HDB UUCP :-) took over this tedious task to provide friendly and nice service to the general public. He who looketh for the needle in the haystack will find the straw that broke the camel's back. -Gary
clarke@utcsri.UUCP (Jim Clarke) (04/21/86)
In article <463@packard.UUCP> gjm@packard.UUCP (59455-GJ Murakami) writes: > ... years ago before HDB UUCP, I used to try to read >the dead mail in the UUCP spool in often futile attempts to return the >failures to the sender with suggestions for retrying (silly me for >trying to be too nice). Needless to say, that was a long time ago. >Automated tools and finally HDB UUCP :-) took over this tedious task to >provide friendly and nice service to the general public. I myself was recently the "victim" of a (presumably overworked) system administrator who returned to me a message I'd sent through his machine, attaching to it the explanation that his machine didn't talk to the next one on the route I'd used. Actually, I knew that and had made a mistake, but had also thought the correct route might fail too, so his action saved me at least a couple of days in getting a mildly important message through. Although he may very well have read only the header and not the body of the message, and although he presumably wouldn't have read any of it if it hadn't been trying a nonexistent routing, still this is an example of a benefit received from administrative snooping. (Thanks, Henry!) People can write some very nice messages for mail-answering programs to use automatically. This may have happened in my case. But as I looked at it from various angles*, it *seemed* human. Even if it was automatic, one might claim that it violated my privacy. You won't get a complaint from me, though. * Of course, I'd never heard of "HDB UUCP" until I read gjm's message. -- Jim Clarke -- Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Toronto, Canada M5S 1A4 (416) 978-4058 {allegra,cornell,decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo}!utcsri!clarke
andrew@stc.UUCP (04/22/86)
First, let me go on record: I have neither the time, nor the
inclination to read any mail not addressed to me, and not causing
a snarl-up in stc's e-mail system.
On the other hand I think one has to regard e-mail much as a picture
postcard, ie as published material, and any defamatory comments in
an e-mail message as libel - it is easy to apply any sort of encryption
to secure your message from casual snooping (Rot13 for instance
would, I believe, suffice to change it to a private communication)
Hmm yes I think this picture-postcard is a good analogy, since there is
the text right alongside the address... comments?
--
Regards,
Andrew Macpherson. <andrew@tcom.stc.co.uk>
{aivru,btnix,concurrent,datlog,iclbra,iclkid,idec,inset,root44,stl,ukc}
!stc!andrewhenry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) (04/23/86)
> [Important message was returned as undeliverable due to addressing error.] > Although he may very well have read only the header and not the body of > the message, and although he presumably wouldn't have read any of it if > it hadn't been trying a nonexistent routing, still this is an example of > a benefit received from administrative snooping. (Thanks, Henry!) (You're welcome, Jim.) Policy here is that mail is private, and is not read by non-addressees without good cause, system administrators or not. Apart from uncommon occurrences, like well-founded suspicion of serious wrongdoing justifying official investigation, exercising sysadmin powers to read private mail is appropriate only when the alternative is loss of the mail. In the absence of a standard flag specifying whether privacy or delivery is more important, we assume that opening a letter is better than throwing it in the garbage. Since utzoo runs old and dumb mail software, the software isn't up to doing automatic bouncing of undeliverable mail: such mail gets dumped in the sysadmin's lap. [Why the old and dumb software? Partly because doing the right thing automatically appears to be an unsolved AI problem, what with stupid gateways and brain-damaged "smart" mailers making horrid messes of what used to be a simple, standard postmark scheme. A good fraction of the dead-letter volume is messages that "smart" mailers have bounced in stupid and incorrect ways!] I read as much of the letter as necessary to infer addressee and/or originator; which one I need depends on the nature of the problem. Usually I only need to read the header, but sometimes the whole text of the message isn't enough. If a judgement call is needed on whether to forward or bounce, I will often take a look at the body to determine whether it appears to be important and time-critical. In any case, the contents are officially forgotten as soon as the letter leaves my hands. > People can write some very nice messages for mail-answering programs to > use automatically. This may have happened in my case. But as I looked > at it from various angles*, it *seemed* human. Half and half, in this case, actually. Certain situations happen often enough that I have stock replies on hand to save time. Although I don't remember the particular message, you probably got one of them. -- Support the International League For The Derision Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology Of User-Friendliness! {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,pyramid}!utzoo!henry