Date: Tue, 7 Oct 1997 10:09:00 EDT From: "punched, spindled, and mutilated..." Subject: Re: FILLER: The mail goes where? [I'm tired, angry, and probably shouldn't be posting at all, but...] Let me provide a little more context for yesterday's posting. I was trying to provide some explanation of the background or technical underpinnings for those who aren't experts. In the process, I did mention my peeves with Eudora (and similar mailers). However, no matter what features or lack of features people are working with, the basic point which I want to emphasize is that you need to think about what you are doing, not just let the technology run away with you. Even worse, you need to communicate with other people about your expectations and methods of using the technology--it don't just happen! I'll come back to that point in a bit... Some points I missed: along with all the other mistakes I have been making recently, I missed a possibility in using Eudora. Apparently WITH the Reply-To-All option turned on, you can press Option (mac?) or Shift (pc) when pressing Reply, and you will get what I consider the "normal" behaviour -- just the Reply-To address being used to form the new message. I should also apologize to those who use Eudora on a regular basis. As I was reminded, the basic reason for the "Reply-To-All" setting is NOT for lists, but rather for mail to those impromptu groups which all of us end up setting up and using for a "little while." When used in that situation, the "Reply-To-All" feature really is a feature, insuring that all the participants in an extended email exchange remain in it, rather than accidentally getting dropped when someone forgets to copy the Cc: line, for example. I'm also aware that it can be very helpful to send a private copy as well as the list copy. For example, I filter all list postings into a secondary mailbox which I do NOT read most of the time while at work. I filter the list bounces into another mailbox. And when the filters are done, there is a distilled essence of email that I need to deal with now. So when people want to get my attention quickly, it is a good idea to send me a private copy along with the list copy. I can easily deal with the large number of messages I get every day this way. Personally, I prefer to get a private copy and a list copy, but I'm not terribly upset either way (although if you only send a copy to the list, there is a chance that I will skim over it in trying to wade through the massages...spelling intentional, there...) Let me repeat: I read my private mail first, then the list traffic (sometimes at midnight, but who's keeping track, right?). So if you positively want me to look at something, feel free to send it to me personally (mbarker@mit.edu) or send it to me with a copy for the list. [at times I have even deliberately sent the person I am replying to an "early review" copy of a message, then later posted to the list. This allows an author a little extra time to prepare a "spontaneous" response] Incidentally, part of the reason I am intimately familiar with Eudora is that for all of our complaints and hesitations about it, MIT has a site license for it and recommends it as the "mailer of choice" for our PC and Mac users. We actually work closely with the developer (although not too closely--he's a bit unusual). Now back to that point about communicating... One of the workshop "bits" which I sometimes do is very simple. I get a volunteer from the group to come up and face me (with the group behind them). Then I raise a sheet of paper between us and demand that they tell me what they see. "Huh? It's a triangle," they say. I take a step forward, shake the paper, and shout: "What the hell is wrong with you, that's not what's on the paper! Can't you see? Tell me what is on the paper, and get it right this time!" One of the best responses I ever got was the "volunteer" taking my hand and turning the paper...so that he could see the circle on my side and I could see the triangle on his side. The point of this bit is simple. What you see, what you know, what you expect, is always a little different from what other people see, know, and expect. And until (or unless?) you communicate, no one knows what you see or expect. [psst? I hand out business size replicas of that sheet of paper when people have been in a workshop with me, so that they can be reminded regularly that the other person is looking at the other side of the paper. Feel free to make up your own, since I can't hand you one...] I get paid, regularly, to sit down with people and help them figure out the "people processing" to go with the technology. Sure, lots of them think I am explaining the technology to them, and in fact I often do explain the alternatives and limits of the technology. But the part that really pays off and makes the technology work for them is getting out in public their expectations about how we are going to use the technology. We may not be able to make it do everything that everyone wants, but by making it clear to all participants what their desires are and what is feasible for them to do, we can at least discuss the problems instead of just irritating them. My point here is that the technology does NOT provide clear guidance as to how to make this kind of list an effective, comfortable place to do whatever it is we are doing. In fact, there are lots of alternatives. I think our job (in this context) is to: (a) clearly understand what the technology allows and doesn't allow (b) to publicly and cooperatively design the ways that we are going to use those capabilities, and (c) to develop ways of effectively explaining those ways to new people as they join the list (along with re-examining the ways when needed) I invite your cooperation and help in tackling that job. tink