Re: nethack popularity contest - number_pad?

[Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@raw.no>]

* "Steve C. Lamb" 

| On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 11:01:57AM +0200, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
| > * "Steve C. Lamb" 
| > |     Doesn't work since to do that requires individual mailings.  Batching is
| > | far better for efficiency.
|  
| > You need to do VERP to handle bounces properly anyway.  And today you
| > can just throw CPU and bandwidth at the problem.  It doesn't seem to
| > be a problem for most people to have it off.
| 
|     I always love people who use this.  Shows they've never really thought the
| matter through.  "What, it's ineffcient?  Well, gee, can't everyone just
| afford a bigger box?"  Of course we'll just ignore the whole point that there
| are two sides to that transaction and the other side just might not want to
| transfer 15 copies of the same message when 15 RCPT TOs work just fine.

It's not like handling mail takes a lot of CPU.  The mail for our
university (~25k users) is easily handled by four boxes.  And if the
cost is a problem for you, then turn it on.

-- 
Tollef Fog Heen                                                        ,''`.
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are      : :' :
                                                                      `. `' 
                                                                        `-