6 ms·

Wow, for the low effort of writing an OOO filter, you can stand out as a company that cares about customers? We use a staff member’s email address on our outbo

Wow, for the low effort of writing an OOO filter, you can stand out as a company that cares about customers? We use a staff member’s email address on our outbound mail, so that people don’t even need to hesitate before responding.

seizethecheese 6y ago
Yeah my thought exactly. Also, going through the effort of filtering tickets also sounds worth it
moksly 6y ago
I think it depends a little on the context. I work in the public sector for instance, setting up a filter for our mail is something that, well, no one has successfully done yet. It’s not for lack of trying, we’ve had (and will continue to have) corporations with both big tech, startups and universities until we get something that’s actually better than outlook rules and a lot of manual sorting. The thing is, we cannot allow to let a single message land in the wrong inbox for more than 48hours. Obviously we don’t send “don’t reply e-mails” and we certainly never would from a domain that isn’t even ours, but filtering messages isn’t always easy. Hell, even with the inclusion of actual UUIDs for departments, and a national standard for sending secure business-to-business mail (post includes) that incorporates these standards, and throwing world leading AI science at it with Microsoft/Amazon/IBM behind it, we still employ two full time positions to handle the left overs and mistakes.
ajuc 6y ago
I've seen a big international bank internal network shut down because someone added a group mail of +- 10 000 people to a thread with jokes. Significant percent of these people were on holidays at the time so they responded automatically to each other with "out of office" messages and finally the network couldn't handle it. Emails are serious business ;)
- eru 6y ago
  > I've seen a big international bank internal network shut down because someone added a group mail of +- 10 000 people to a thread with jokes. Those stories are always entertaining. But honestly, those organisations only have themselves to blame. Filtering and stopping these internal chains shouldn't be any harder than basic spam filtering. Mostly easier, because your filter inputs are not as adversarial.
  - jerf 6y ago
    May you be so lucky in your career as to always correctly predict the obvious-in-hindsight.
    - eru 6y ago
      Sorry, I don't understand. There's no rocket science here. Especially not today. You could also 'just' move your company to using Google's corporate gmail offering, and let Google handle those problems for you. (And if your company doesn't have the capacity to make such a change, they do only have themselves to blame.)
      - jerf 6y ago
        "Sorry, I don't understand." If you don't yet, you will someday.

seizethecheese 6y ago

Yeah my thought exactly. Also, going through the effort of filtering tickets also sounds worth it

moksly 6y ago

I think it depends a little on the context. I work in the public sector for instance, setting up a filter for our mail is something that, well, no one has successfully done yet. It’s not for lack of trying, we’ve had (and will continue to have) corporations with both big tech, startups and universities until we get something that’s actually better than outlook rules and a lot of manual sorting. The thing is, we cannot allow to let a single message land in the wrong inbox for more than 48hours. Obviously we don’t send “don’t reply e-mails” and we certainly never would from a domain that isn’t even ours, but filtering messages isn’t always easy. Hell, even with the inclusion of actual UUIDs for departments, and a national standard for sending secure business-to-business mail (post includes) that incorporates these standards, and throwing world leading AI science at it with Microsoft/Amazon/IBM behind it, we still employ two full time positions to handle the left overs and mistakes.

ajuc 6y ago

I've seen a big international bank internal network shut down because someone added a group mail of +- 10 000 people to a thread with jokes. Significant percent of these people were on holidays at the time so they responded automatically to each other with "out of office" messages and finally the network couldn't handle it. Emails are serious business ;)

eru 6y ago
> I've seen a big international bank internal network shut down because someone added a group mail of +- 10 000 people to a thread with jokes. Those stories are always entertaining. But honestly, those organisations only have themselves to blame. Filtering and stopping these internal chains shouldn't be any harder than basic spam filtering. Mostly easier, because your filter inputs are not as adversarial.
- jerf 6y ago
  May you be so lucky in your career as to always correctly predict the obvious-in-hindsight.
  - eru 6y ago
    Sorry, I don't understand. There's no rocket science here. Especially not today. You could also 'just' move your company to using Google's corporate gmail offering, and let Google handle those problems for you. (And if your company doesn't have the capacity to make such a change, they do only have themselves to blame.)
    - jerf 6y ago
      "Sorry, I don't understand." If you don't yet, you will someday.