From owner-freebsd-current  Thu Oct 31 11:08:47 1996
Return-Path: owner-current
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id LAA28555
          for current-outgoing; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 11:08:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA28548;
          Thu, 31 Oct 1996 11:08:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id MAA25818; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 12:03:13 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199610311903.MAA25818@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: /var/mail (was: re: Help, permission problems...)
To: karl@Mcs.Net (Karl Denninger)
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 12:03:13 -0700 (MST)
Cc: terry@lambert.org, MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU, gpalmer@FreeBSD.org,
        jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com, j@uriah.heep.sax.de,
        roberto@keltia.freenix.fr, current@FreeBSD.org, scrappy@ki.net
In-Reply-To: <199610311858.MAA16345@Mars.mcs.net> from "Karl Denninger" at Oct 31, 96 12:58:03 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> > > What about my users who thank me for *NOT* doing this, because
> > > they find Elm's options too confusing?
> > 
> > I can't believe elm is still that popular (even though it's *my* personal
> > favorite).  I have to say this has got to be a reductio ad absurdum
> > argument -- a straw man.  It's possible to test the failure case during
> > config by compiling up a small test program.
> 
> ELM is incredibly popular.  About half our user base prefers it, and we 
> have a LARGE user base.
> 
> If I break something in elm on our ISP, I hear about it in minutes if not
> faster.  Then again, its *MY* preferred user agent as well.


I am not suggesting anything which would break elm.  I am suggesting
that the appeal to "my users who thank me for *NOT* doing this" is a
strawman.  If done correctly, the user never sees the process.

I think it is generally agreed that users complain when things break,
and remain silent when things work.  If they didn't we would have to
pick a strategy other than 'making things work' to reduce the amount
of phone traffic we have to hire people to handle.

I have *never*, in 12 years, gotten a support call over something working.

YMMV.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.