Old Email Archive

digest 1999-03-06 #001.txt


11:30 PM 3/5/99 -0800
From: "Society for Literature & Science" 

Daily SLS Email Digest
-> Re: accidental responses
by Phoebe Sengers 

-> Re: accidental responses
by "Edward W. Fox jr." 
-> Reply-To Vote is in....
by WAYNEM@HUMnet.UCLA.EDU
-> MLA '99 call for papers: Literature and Latour
by bruno@TTACS.TTU.EDU
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 5 Mar 1999 07:33:04 -0800
From: Phoebe Sengers 

Subject: Re: accidental responses
Hello everyone,
Not to go on about an argument that may only be of interest to 4 list
members, but I think I should give more context to my original post.
The reason I felt strongly enough about this issue to write in and
complain is because I nearly made a gaffe that would have cost me
dearly.
The other day, I logged in and read an email from my friend Doug that
told me he just got back from NY and had pink eye (sound familiar?).  I
hit "reply" and wrote him back a letter that included not only
the usual
litany of personal information that would be mildly embarassing to
broadcast to the list, but also a discussion of a sensitive political
situation at our university.   By some miracle of God, I deleted this
before I sent it out and potentially did major damage to my career.
The moral argument that "you should know what you're doing when
you
reply to the list" does not work if you get a letter that is
addressed
to you personally (on account of a previous "reply-to" gaffe).
 I had no
idea the original letter was sent to list-sci and therefore no clue
that
I needed to change the headers.  Granted, the cost to the list would
have been minimal if my letter had reached everyone's mailboxes, and
potentially would have even brought a few people a good laugh.  But the
damage to *me* would have gone far beyond a little embarrassment.  This
is the not insubstantial cost of the current "reply-to" state:
anyone
who posts anything to the list takes the chance that with some future
innocuous reply to seemingly personal email they will inadvertently
post
sensitive, personal and/or professional info to the list.
Brrr, it still gives me the chills!!
Phoebe Sengers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 5 Mar 1999 08:46:15 -0800
From: "Edward W. Fox jr." 
Subject: Re: accidental responses
Such errors seldom happen, usually only when the writer is upset,
having
just written something personal and emotionally very stressful.
(Phoebe,
you are not the only one.)
Ed Fox
Phoebe Sengers wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> Not to go on about an argument that may only be of interest to 4
list
> members, but I think I should give more context to my original
post.
> The reason I felt strongly enough about this issue to write in and
> complain is because I nearly made a gaffe that would have cost me
> dearly.
>
> The other day, I logged in and read an email from my friend Doug
that
> told me he just got back from NY and had pink eye (sound
familiar?).  I
> hit "reply" and wrote him back a letter that included not
only the usual
> litany of personal information that would be mildly embarassing to
> broadcast to the list, but also a discussion of a sensitive
political
> situation at our university.   By some miracle of God, I deleted
this
> before I sent it out and potentially did major damage to my
career.
>
> The moral argument that "you should know what you're doing
when you
> reply to the list" does not work if you get a letter that is
addressed
> to you personally (on account of a previous "reply-to"
gaffe).  I had no
> idea the original letter was sent to list-sci and therefore no clue
that
> I needed to change the headers.  Granted, the cost to the list
would
> have been minimal if my letter had reached everyone's mailboxes,
and
> potentially would have even brought a few people a good laugh.  But
the
> damage to *me* would have gone far beyond a little embarrassment. 
This
> is the not insubstantial cost of the current "reply-to"
state: anyone
> who posts anything to the list takes the chance that with some
future
> innocuous reply to seemingly personal email they will inadvertently
post
> sensitive, personal and/or professional info to the list.
>
> Brrr, it still gives me the chills!!
>
> Phoebe Sengers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 5 Mar 1999 10:13:54 -0800
From: WAYNEM@HUMnet.UCLA.EDU
Subject: Reply-To Vote is in....
Hi,
This little bit of democracy seems to have worked out well!
1) The votes came in briskly. The final tally is 5 for "on"
and 15 for "off."
Read on if you are willing to be bombarded with my take on things. My
last
item below offers an alternative for those who like the
"reply-to".
2) I was asked how the "private-to-public" email problem came
about. The list
has always had "reply-to" enabled, from back when Joe Amato
was the able list
owner. I suspect that this problem has emerged as email has become more
integral to people's lives. More private stuff on email, more chances
for 
mistakes. Also, as more people use fancier email clients, it may be that
the
important details such as the recipient(s) are becoming obscured.
3) As some people have pointed out, there are ways of controlling the
situation through your email program, whether that means "replying
to all" on
Eudora, or copying and pasting addresses in other situations. I'm using
something of a dog email program, but it has more than one saving grace:
I
can preset the reply option so that it only picks up sender, not the
reply-to
address. This has saved me several times. Unfortunately email programs
differ
tremendously, so no one piece of advice will help everyone.
4) If I admit to having been saved myself, people might ask why I
didn't
disable reply-to years ago. I must say that I consider some personal
email
gone astray a smaller problem for a list such as this than having people
drop
off into private conversations that were initially meant to be public.
If 
this seems callous, especially considering Phoebe's near disaster, I
would
plead that multiple To: addresses and lurking CC:'s are even more
insidious
for misdirecting email than reply-to's. One must learn to take care;
there is
no other way. -- And :MOMENTARY SOAPBOX POSTURE: email client developers
have
to learn to help the users deal with this problem!
5) There was a clever suggestion of putting in a header that could be
altered
so that reply-to might be enabled. Unfortunately, most clients won't let
you
alter incoming text. Another idea was to add "NOSPAM" to the
replyto address,
thus preventing the message from being delivered successfully to the
reply-to
address unless one specifically alters it. This kind of trick is a
necessary
evil because of spammers, but I wouldn't want to do this as list
administrator. I'm a postmaster, too, and it's safe to say that there
is
already enough bounced mail in this world!
6) LET ME PROPOSE AN ALTERNATIVE FOR THOSE WHO LIKE REPLY-TO'S! Since
I'm not
only list owner, but the listserv administrator, I can pretty much do as
I
like. I can create a secondary list called "litsci-l-reply".
If there are 
people interested, they would unsubscribe from litsci-l and subscribe
to
litsci-l-reply. They would see all the same email as litsci-l members
and be
able to send to litsci-l, but with the "reply-to" on. Let me
know.
Wayne
/----------------------------------------------------------/
Wayne Miller                        waynem@humnet.ucla.edu
Manager, HCF Academic Services   /    Asst. Adj. Professor
Humanities Computing Facility        343 Kinsey Hall, UCLA
Germanic Languages                    212 Royce Hall, UCLA
(310) 206-2004                      FAX:    (310) 825-7428              

/----------------------------------------------------------/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 5 Mar 1999 10:37:02 -0800
From: bruno@TTACS.TTU.EDU
Subject: MLA '99 call for papers: Literature and Latour
The MLA Division on Literature and Science was inadvertently omitted
from the Spring 1999 MLA Newsletter.  Please be advised of the
following
panel to be held at the Chicago MLA meeting.  We welcome your
participation and would appreciate your assistance in passing this call
to interested colleagues and posting it to related discussion lists.
Literature and Latour.  Papers welcome on any aspect of the
significance
of Bruno Latour's writings for literary criticism and theory.  1-2 page
abstracts by March 20; Bruce Clarke 
******************* NOTE *******************
There may be important message content
contained in the following MIME Information.
********************************************
- ------------------ MIME Information follows ------------------
- --------------CFDFB97DA11AFE2D63915026
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<<<<<< See above "Message Body"
>>>>>>
- --------------CFDFB97DA11AFE2D63915026
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
The MLA Division on Literature and Science was inadvertently omitted
from
the Spring 1999 MLA Newsletter.  Please be advised of the
following
panel to be held at the Chicago MLA meeting.  We welcome your
participation
and would appreciate your assistance in passing this call to interested
colleagues and posting it to related discussion lists.






Literature and Latour.  Papers welcome on any aspect of
the significance of Bruno Latour's writings for literary criticism and
theory.  1-2 page abstracts by March 20; Bruce Clarke
<bruno@ttu.edu>- --------------CFDFB97DA11AFE2D63915026--