in reply to RE: MonkMail! in thread MonkMail!
I don't want to sound contrary, but why reinvent the wheel? basically, having a forwarding address @perlmonks.org would let you do what you're suggesting only when someone wanted to leave one of these 'longer /msg's' (which is exactly how i've been thinking about this too), they would just shoot an email to Petruchio@perlmonks.org
That way vroom does next to no work (add a script that puts an alias in a sendmail config upon a user achieving XYZ status), there's no need for monks to check any extra pages for messages they weren't already and there's no upgrade/enhancement worries on the code side should the monastery have a major overhaul or something (not to say it needs even the slightest tweak, but sometimes you just have to re-write code because it's there : )
"sometimes when you make a request for the head you don't
want the big, fat body...don't you go snickering."
-- Nathan Torkington UoP2K a.k.a gnat
RE: RE: RE: MonkMail!
by Petruchio (Vicar) on Oct 29, 2000 at 18:58 UTC
|
Well, you do sound contrary. Lucky for you this is
Perl Monks Discussion, and contrary opinions are
pretty well required for interesting discussion. ;-)
First, I don't want mail from non-monks. Naturally, if I
can easily have things this way, I don't care how the
system gets implemented on the back end. I would be happy
if those monks who wanted @perlmonks.org addresses got
them. But email is a commonplace service; monk-only mail
would actually be a new service.
Second, do they have sendmail installed here? I don't
know; I know next to nothing about how things are set up
behind the scenes here. I'm not sure if they're managing
blockstackers.com mail in-house, and if they are, I'm not
sure they'd want to mess with it.
Third, I'd rather see messages from other monks here
than elsewhere. I want my PerlMonks stuff here, and other
stuff in other places. And I'd prefer not to have to set
up some email account, and then configure it so that it
rejected all mail except that forwarded from
PerlMonks.
Fourth, I'm not wholly comforted by the thought of
people showing up here simply so they can get
@perlmonks.org accounts... as seems inevitable.
Adding the /msg pages I mentioned seem like a very
simple hack, which could be expanded in time with
options to receive and send external mail, or to forward
all mail to an external address. Offering another
email address to a bunch of people who probably have
a dozen addresses apiece seems more like reinventing
the wheel.
But I say this with all respect for your opinion. :-) | [reply] |
|
hmmm... I suppose your point about mail from non-monks is VERY valid. hadn't thought about it really. jptxs needs to meditate on this further
"sometimes when you make a request for the head you don't
want the big, fat body...don't you go snickering."
-- Nathan Torkington UoP2K a.k.a gnat
| [reply] |
|
> First, I don't want mail from non-monks.
While I understand this concern, I don't really agree with it. As AgentM mentioned in
the root of this thread, being able to list brainpan@perlmonks.org on my resume would be
desirable. Making this be an esoteric form of perlmonk-only communication would render
this benefit null and void. However, I do agree that there should be some defining
characteristic from mail coming from non-permonks. I've never really done much with
sendmail, but if it would be possible to add NonPerlmonk=True to the message header
(and not including this field for perlmonks, lest headers be forged) this would give your
mail client's mail filters something to search for and deal with as you see fit.
> Fourth, I'm not wholly comforted by the thought of people showing up here simply so they can get @perlmonks.org accounts... as seems inevitable.
You seem to be neglecting the fact that this would be true of your 'private message page'
method as well. In either case, making a perlmonk(ey) rise to a certain status before
being granted an email address would seem to solve the problem.
| [reply] |
|
> First, I don't want mail from non-monks.
While I understand this concern, I don't really agree
with it.
You don't agree with my not wanting mail from non-monks?!
That seems very strange.
As AgentM mentioned in the root of this thread, being
able to list brainpan@perlmonks.org on my resume would be
desirable.
Let me say again, "I would be happy if those monks who
wanted @perlmonks.org addresses got them." When you can
put that address on your resume, I will applaud.
Making this be an esoteric form of perlmonk-only
communication would render this benefit null and
void.
This whole site is, for the most part, an esoteric form of
perlmonk-only communciation (the Anonymous Monk account
being the limited exception). Helping the members of
this community communciate with each other more
efficiently seems central to the purpose of the site.
Giving the members of this community an email alias
seems more like sugar frosting. Nevertheless, there's no
reason why we couldn't have both.
this would give your mail client's mail filters
something to search for and deal with as you see fit.
Placing the burden of (yet more) tinkering with spam
filters on individual monks seems a poor solution. If it
came to that, I'd rather not have Monk Mail. Having
sendmail redirect to /dev/null would be much better,
though it still wouldn't accomplish what I'd like
without an onsite spool and web-based client.
> Fourth, I'm not wholly comforted by the thought
of people showing up here simply so they can get
@perlmonks.org accounts... as seems inevitable.
You seem to be neglecting the fact that this would be
true of your 'private message page' method as well.
Having Monks-only onsite mail would certainly not draw
users to the site who were not already interested enough
to be here. Nevertheless, I do not really regard
this as a viable objection to the idea of mainstream
@perlmonks.org addresses. The benefits much outweigh the
possible drawbacks. But it is something of a concern.
I think I'd prefer to see the requirements for an
address set higher, rather than lower, for this reason.
But I don't feel very strongly about this either.
Understand, I'm not a provincial person, and I want the
site to grow. I want everybody to get what they want out
of whatever email system evolves. I simply feel that in
this case, my notion would be simpler and quicker to
implement, and would actually consitute something new for
the monks, rather than a gloss on something they've
already got. I respect your opinion, but thus far I have
not heard an argument which would make me change my own.
| [reply] |
|
Gee, I didn't realize it was such a problem. the solution would be, of course, to offer options on each disputable topic: I suggested mail forwarding for incoming mail, don't want it? just flip the switch in your user settings. No internal monk mail either, just flip the switch...of course, I agree that, like MonkMaps!, this should be optional. Thanx for all of the great feedback- i eagerly await vroom's response...
AgentM Systems nor Nasca Enterprises nor
Bone::Easy nor Macperl is responsible for the
comments made by
AgentM. Remember, you can build any logical system with NOR.
| [reply] |
|
> First, I don't want mail from non-monks.
While I understand this concern, I don't really agree with it. As AgentM mentioned in
the root of this thread, being able to list brainpan@perlmonks.org on my resume would be
desirable. Making this be an esoteric form of perlmonk-only communication would render
this benefit null and void. However, I do agree that there should be some defining
characteristic from mail coming from non-permonks. I've never really done much with
sendmail, but if it would be possible to add NonPerlmonk=True to the message header
(and not including this field for perlmonks, lest headers be forged) this would give your
mail client's mail filters something to search for and deal with as you see fit.
> Fourth, I'm not wholly comforted by the thought of people showing up here simply so they can get @perlmonks.org accounts... as seems inevitable.
You seem to be neglecting the fact that this would be true of your 'private message page'
method as well. In either case, making a perlmonk(ey) rise to a certain status before
being granted an email address would seem to solve the problem.
| [reply] |
|
|