[Reading-hall-of-fame] more on Colin's posting

[David Reinking]

Dear esteemed colleagues,

I’d like to piggyback on Colin’s posting about how the listserv operates and how it might serve all of us better.  Please see the attached cartoon.  I hope that it might pop into your mind’s eye every time your cursor or finger moves to the “reply all” option.   Like many New Yorker cartoons, it requires relevant background to fully appreciate the humor.  If that is the case, you might enter the following or similar terms into your favorite search engine: “netiquette,” “Listserv guidelines,” “bandwidth.”  There are clearly legitimate uses for “reply all,” but it requires some reflective discretion and informed sensitivities.

Ken’s original posting was delightful, welcome, and appropriate in my view.  Not so much the flurry of “bandwagon” replies to all (they used to be called “me-too” replies, but that moniker has now been fully appropriated on Twitter for a much more serious and disturbing purpose).  On the other hand, there are alternative online options for disseminating postings that are likely to evoke mainly affirmatory, congratulatory responses, or good wishes.  A posting to the listserv with a link to such online options (e.g., an interactive section of the HoF webpage/newsletter) would be a nice way to handle such situations in our case.

Best to all for 2018 (the 25th anniversary of AOL making global email a then-new reality/literacy).  May the new year bring renewed commitment to doing the things you’ve been wanting to do, to keep on keeping on, and to re-engaging in the pursuit of new activities and areas of knowledge as Ken sagely advises.

David Reinking
Emeritus Professor of Education
http://www.davidreinking.info<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-253A-252F-252Fwww.davidreinking.info-252F-26data-3D01-257C01-257Clg40-2540txstate.edu-257Cd43f2d8241584a0ca81608d50aa7b5c9-257Cb19c134a14c94d4caf65c420f94c8cbb-257C0-26sdata-3Dji-252FNnlYJBKtAbG0lEfttgJUZxsi6BinXvN1OaPMm5Uc-253D-26reserved-3D0&d=DwMFAg&c=Ngd-ta5yRYsqeUsEDgxhcqsYYY1Xs5ogLxWPA_2Wlc4&r=gUnMZ3Xw_juA4Q4q8MsCC_IKO_x_v_mImmv8TQcuKAs&m=UedHPeoTlZDAK_Y35nsdvaZ1tvfVsAXM3l43vQNlACI&s=5qWqgpYErOqlfng1rqjL41TgwAGTYZ6oMB15g45RwUc&e=>/
orcid.org/0000-0001-8040-6673David Reinking

From: <reading-hall-of-fame-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk> on behalf of Colin Harrison <Colin.Harrison at nottingham.ac.uk>
Date: Thursday, January 4, 2018 at 10:44 AM
To: reading hall of fame <reading-hall-of-fame at nottingham.ac.uk>
Subject: [Reading-hall-of-fame] Where did Ken's posting go?

Hi everyone

If you are a Reading Hall of Fame member, and if I have your correct email address, then every posting to the list is sent to your address.  The system doesn’t pick and choose.

So how come some folk didn’t receive Ken’s posting (or else received his posting but not the attachment)?

There are three possible reasons:

1.  You have checked the ‘Digest’ option- this holds messages until there is a group, and then sends them out. Very few folk do this, but this is what JoBeth had done (I’ve unchecked it for you, JoBeth).

2. The message reached your email system, but your system treated it as suspicious. This could be because (despite my many requests that he does not do this), Ken also included other recipients (one of which was another list) in his posting.  Some spam filters automatically delete, or send to your Junk or to Trash postings to a list serve that have both an attachment and multiple recipients.

3.  You were right to feel paranoia – the Internet is against you.

Assuming that Reason 2 was the cause, a repost from Ken (with only one recipient) might do the trick.

However, those who suspect Reason 3 might do worse than to take a look in their Junk or Trash folders for a wee missive from Arizona.

Best regards

Colin







This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee

and may contain confidential information. If you have received this

message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.



Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this

message or in any attachment.  Any views or opinions expressed by the

author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the

University of Nottingham.



This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an

attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your

computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email

communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as

permitted by UK legislation.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/private/reading-hall-of-fame/attachments/20180104/8db3f30e/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: New Yorker cartoon20150922_09173808.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 42412 bytes
Desc: New Yorker cartoon20150922_09173808.pdf
URL: <http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/private/reading-hall-of-fame/attachments/20180104/8db3f30e/attachment-0001.pdf>