This doesn't work in Outlook, because I don't get the individual's
address that I can copy and paste.  In this case, it just read "On
behalf of Dan Levin" without an address.

John

-----Original Message-----
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dan Levin
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 5:21 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: List Technology

>I agree with Ed Swaine and would support changing the listserv
>settings if possible so as to make it more diffficult to send a
>reply to the whole listserv membership by accident.  I've
>inadvertently sent messages to ALSBTALK a couple of times and
>luckily I said nothing I was particularly embarrassed by (don't
>laugh if I make a mistake and sent something highly confidential in
>the future...).

>We've all seen many confidential messages sent to the whole listserv
>by mistake.  It's easy to do when the sender is tired or busy.  On
>another listserv, a prof sent to everyone, by mistake, a very
>confidential message discussing the qualifications of a candidate
>for a high office in his university.

In the meantime, when I intend to reply to just the individual who
sent the message to ALSBTALK, I use the "forward" button and then
insert the individual's name in the "To" space.  So far this has
solved the problem for me, except for the times when I forgot to hit
"forward" and hit "reply" instead.

Dan Levin
Minn. State

-----

>Though I may be one of the very few who care, I'd continue to
>dissent on the list settings, at least since the issue is rearing its
>head again.  At the risk of repeating what's already been said:
>        1.  While it is in theory easy to avoid accidentally replying
to
>the list, it seems to happen not infrequently.  Some of this is
>inevitable -- on lists that are set differently, members sometimes hit
>"reply all" by accident, too -- but I'd wager it could be reduced by
>changing the setting.  I'm not sure why this hasn't been done, save for
>the supposed benefit of watching others make mistakes.  Perhaps Dan can
>speak to this.
>        2.  As to that, I agree that it is occasionally fun to see what
>results, and it probably even outweighs the spam effect for me -- so
>far.  But I would just caution that it is sometimes not so fun for
those
>screwing up.  I have had students humiliate themselves in the eyes of
>their peers by accidentally posting to class lists when those were set
>incorrectly, and I have been on professional and academic lists in
which
>members accidentally distributed posts that contained very embarrassing
>content (among those that come to mind are one involving what appeared
>to be an assignation, and another in which an attorney spoke
>disparagingly, and obscenely, of a judge in front of whom he was
>appearing, who was supposedly also a list subscriber).  I doubt I'm the
>only one who's seen a message that the sender fervently wishes had not
>been mistakenly sent to everyone.
>        As a courtesy, I will leave it to Frank to describe the
limerick
>about the Lemon test that he accidentally sent to a conlaw listserve.
>        3.  As to the privacy issue Peter raises, it seems to me this
>concern is in tension with the lack of concern about list mechanics.
>For better or for worse, list messages distributed as email are out in
>the world -- information wants to be free! -- independent of the
archive
>altogether.  Indeed, I suspect that the more personal or inadvertently
>amusing messages are the more likely to be saved (and forwarded),
>without any guarantee of deletion or security.   So I'd rather heed
what
>gets sent to the list than harbor any illusions about security
>afterward.
>        Best,
>        [log in to unmask]
>
>        -----Original Message-----
>From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peter Bowal
>Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 3:11 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: List Technology
>
>        I am one of the many who really appreciates the consistent hard
>work of
>        Dan Herron in maintaining the ALSB website and ALSBtalk list.
>Dan, you
>        are doing a fantastic job.  I hope you never retire; I can't
>imagine
>        trying to find a replacement ExSec from the pool of lesser
>mortals.
>
>        The ALSBtalk reply-button gives us all one good chance to make
a
>fool of
>        ourselves in public.  Agreed, some people savor the opportunity
>several
>        times.  Having made my gaffe in 2002 (I remember the precise
>minute),
>        I'm fine with the current settings - although one expects
>virtually
>        everyone will eventually take a turn or two.  Think of how it
>        contributes to our humility and sensitivity for the mistakes of
>others.
>        Perhaps the ALSBtalk reply-button is why so many others
continue
>to lurk
>        - possessed of a prurient fascination to behold the sucker who
>next
>        falls into that trap.  And how embarassing will it be?  No
>scandalous
>        betrayals or unfiltered "what I really think" public "oops" to
>titter
>        about yet.
>
>        May I raise a related point?  I think the major technology and
>privacy
>        concern of ALSBtalk is that all of our messages are organized
and
>        archived (by Miami University's listserve?) on the web.  They
are
>open
>        and searchable by month/year and thread.
>
>        While ALSBtalk is by subscription of members, and a clubby town
>hall of
>        280 may be getting close to a notion of "public", one should
>still know
>        that anyone in the world can read what we write on ALSBtalk
>through
>        eternity.
>
>        My own ALSBtalk postings are found on the links below, back to
>1994.
>        Google yourself to find your message trail.
>
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9405&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9407&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9408&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9409&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9410&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9501&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9505&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9506&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9509&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9510&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9511&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9512&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind9602&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9603&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9610&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9705&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9706&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9710&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind9711&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind0207&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind0210&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind0211&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind0301&L=alsbtalk
>        http://listserv.muohio.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A1=ind0304&L=alsbtalk
>
>        Dan, this might be ultra-efficient storage and backup systems
>operating,
>        but I wonder if we should try to get the ALSBtalk archives
>deleted or at
>        least accessible only to list subscribers (password protected).
>
>        Cheers,
>        Peter Bowal
>        University of Calgary


--
Daniel A. Levin, JD, MBA
Associate Professor of Business Law
Minnesota State University, Mankato
Dept. of Accounting and Business Law
Morris Hall 150
Mankato, MN 56001
507.389.1827
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]