Ayman_ Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 I am going to be setting a limit to the number of times that our servers will allow a user to check mail. There are certain users checking for mail every 5 seconds. Heck there is one guy on server15 checking every second. This is crazy and is putting a major strain (which is not even neccessary) on our servers. I am thinking one check every five minutes? Thats 13 per hour. Would anyone have problems with this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCH-Don Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 one check every five minutes seems very reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEO Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 Every 5 sec. is a bit excessive. However, you'all seem to be real big users of IM which allows you to not rely so heavy on quick email responses. Some of us use our email a little more frequently. How about every 2-3 min.? Unreasonable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkwoof Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 I think generally that would not be a problem. It would be however, inconvenient when we develop and test scripts such as feedback forms; where a test form would send the collected data to our emails, and we would have to wait 5 minutes in order to retry the script (after modifications, assuming we're only making slight changes). Is the "abuse" frequent or regular? I would prefer restrictions to be made on a case-by-case basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ykwong Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 I would prefer restrictions to be made on a case-by-case basis. agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinW Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 Keep in mind a couple of things about the time setting for checking POP3 email: 1. You need to provide enough time to allow an email with a long attachment to finish downloading. If you have your POP3 checking every 60 seconds, but an attachment will take 3 mintes to download ... you may enter the world of email thrashing ... the client side keeps asking if there's new email, but the server side can't finish sending the old email from the last request 2. Interesting to note that on Microsoft's Exchange 2000 Servers, the minimum time that you can configure their POP3 connector to check for new email is 15 minutes! Yep, minutes, not seconds. 3. Personally, I have several Exchange 2000 servers installed, and not one customer of mine have ever noticed that email only arrives every 15 minutes. And you know what, unless I were to make a big deal of it ... they will never know! 4. So, If you have users trying to configure their email clients in seconds, I would urge rethinking this situation. Most personal installs of Outlook Express or Outlook or Eudora that I do, I usually set the POP3 connector to 5 minute intervals ... which seem to be more than adequate. Just my $.02 worth! -kw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shammer Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 I think a case by case basis would be best or at least make it every 2-3 minutes. Then if the problem continues bump it up to 5 minutes. Out of curiosity, what is the default setting for horde to refresh it's mail check? One of my clients and myself usually have horde open all day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayman_ Posted March 14, 2003 Author Share Posted March 14, 2003 This will not be done on a case by case setting. This will be done on a server wide basis. Thank your fellow hosters for this. The setting has been applied to server 5 and 16 as a test bed. Sorry guys, this is coming down the pipe... Lets try to nail a number down. Right now every five minutes seems pretty fair to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lianna Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 I say 5 minutes. Then if it becomes an overwhelming issue (ie: majority of account holders are suffering) then adjust as fit. My pennies. Spitwad is right on in that managing something like this on a case-by-case basis would be a huge nightmare. It has to be done at the server level. If we were talking about one or two account holders that were in an abusive mode, it might be different. I think there is probably a more wide-spread issue than is really uncovered in Spitwad's original post. Lianna Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayman_ Posted March 14, 2003 Author Share Posted March 14, 2003 Personally I think setting a limit only makes good sense. The less pop3 traffic to the servers the better it is for everyone. Also I am looking at setting a max number of outgoing emails per hour, this would REALLY tick of any spammers that may be lurking on our servers. Not sure where to go with this, right now this will require some more thought. Ayman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sangel79 Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 I am wondering if like previously mentioned it could be initially set to 2-3 minutes and if the servers are still flooded then moving to the 5 min mark. If it is set originally at 5 min it will never be brought down. I feel that 5 min may be a bit much, not so much for receiving as for sending emails, i realize a compromise must be settled on but Sending email when i need to is important. I chose this host due to the total package including the unlimited email. Just my input, Also my email is not letting me send email either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEO Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 Also I am looking at setting a max number of outgoing emails per hour, this would REALLY tick of any spammers that may be lurking on our servers. Not sure where to go with this, right now this will require some more thought. This makes a lot of sense to me! I am re-lobbying for 2-3 min. on the email check; I did not even consider darkwoof's very good point about test scripts. I often have to test scripts for my client's. When testing, 5 min. can be an eternity! lobby - lobby - lobby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinW Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 Let's be clear what limit spitwad is suggesting for email restirction. My understanding he's only talking about limiting how often the servers check for incoming email to your web site's mail accounts. Correct? Incorrect? As far as putting restrictions on outgoing email, FWIW, here is Verizon's policy: The maximum number of recipients per message is 100. If your distribution list is greater than 100 recipients, you will need to break it into smaller increments. If you try to send a message to more than 100 recipients, you receive an error message. Additionally, Verizon Online customers who try to send more than 500 e-mails in an hour are blocked from sending any e-mail for 24 hours; however, you can still receive e-mail and access the Internet. -kw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayman_ Posted March 14, 2003 Author Share Posted March 14, 2003 Hi, Two things. Limiting pop3 floods refers to this - To limit the number of times a user can connect to a pop3 server per hour. Limiting send mail is an effort to limit the amount of mail any one user can send per hour. I hope that makes it more clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shammer Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 KW, Verizon's policy is pretty good. If this outgoing email restriction comes to being I would hope the numbers are high. I don't like spammers and would love to see them being fought with these limits but if you put a restriction where I can only send 20 or 30 emails and hour I would be pretty discouraged. I use my email for my business, my real job, school, and my personal use. I can easily send that many emails in an hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayman_ Posted March 14, 2003 Author Share Posted March 14, 2003 In reality the final numbers are going to be something like Pop3 Connections @ around every 30 seconds or 120 an hour. Maybe every 45 seconds. Outgoing email allowance at around 1000 per hour. It will be very a reasonable amount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicfrisk Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 I agree that checking e-mail every one second might be way too much (not to mention I current am set to 30 seconds when logged in and would have zero clue how to set it to a faster speed as I use 100% webmail due to travel ), however you should keep in mind some things before imposing what I think would be a very poor decision in terms of futre referrals and customer service image if you go anywhere past 30 seconds. Having anything longer than 30 seconds would be rather unacceptable to me. I think that for you to continue to be a leading small business web host that anything past thirty seconds is hurting some customers alot due to the 1 second abusers. I would support an immediate 30 second level check so that the true abusers are not affectign the normal users. Set it to 30 seconds and see what happens. Anything longer than that makes me seriously question Total Choice's commitment to being a top-tier small business webhost - as I frequently have numerous quick e-mails back and forth with my clients. I should not be able to have instant e-mail on a free service like Yahoo and have considerably worse and infrequent service on a web host and domain that I pay for, that is just plain wrong in so many ways I don't know where to start. So, again, please do not make a poor decision and go to longer than 30 seconds, it will cause many people to reconsider thier choice of web host. Thank you for seriously listening to my opinion and acting in a rational fashion. I also have the need to occasionally send one mass e-mail, so server level limits to play policeman for the frequent abusers are again not the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borfast Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 If any limit is to be imposed, I'd prefer it to be 30 seconds. Not more than that. Here's why: as some people already mentioned, some times we need to test scripts and so we need the ability to send/receive several e-mails in just a minute or less. And another thing, that I don't think anyone mentioned: what if I need to send an urgent e-mail and get blocked by the server? What about receiving an urgent e-mail? It happened to me before: I needed to receive an e-mail with some important stuff and I was already late for class (the stuff I needed was for the class). I didn't manage to get the e-mail, got pissed at my friend who sent the files because I thought he didn't send them but later I found out that my ISP was limiting the checking of e-mails to once every 15 minutes...... no need to say that in that very same day I changed ISP So if you are indeed going to impose those limits, please think really carefully about what you do so you don't hurt your customers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tastewar Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 This thread probably explains why I've been having trouble getting email today. I am on server16, and my client is setup to check every 2 minutes. The "every second" might have been me earlier, except that all the connections were failing to logon, so I kept trying. Sorry if it was. I'd vote for 3 minutes -- 5 can be a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayman_ Posted March 14, 2003 Author Share Posted March 14, 2003 server16 has been removed from the test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCH-Andy Posted March 14, 2003 Share Posted March 14, 2003 I use 10 email accounts of my 'unlimited' allowance, I normally check them all, one after the other - does this mean that it would take me 5 mins (10 * 30 secs) to check my emails since they are all on the same main account, or would this count as 10 different POP3 requests? Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smgcircle Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 Is this still running on server5? I've been having email problems all day! == Steve == Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cherryo Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 My first instinct upon seeing the Pop3 flood post was to change my Outlook settings from checking my mail every 5 minutes to every 8 minutes. When I know something urgent is coming I can then check manually. I wonder if any others who are able might be so inclined so that we don't have to have an imposed limit. My work does involve some script checking which would be very difficult with any limit on checking email. Might it be possible to ask customers to limit their low-priority emails with the understanding that if things don't improve a limit will be imposed? I would gladly hold off on my ordinary emails to preserve the capability of using email more often when necessary. I don't know . . . maybe I'm an incurable optimist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lianna Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 Anything longer than that makes me seriously question Total Choice's commitment to being a top-tier small business webhost - as I frequently have numerous quick e-mails back and forth with my clients. I should not be able to have instant e-mail on a free service like Yahoo and have considerably worse and infrequent service on a web host and domain that I pay for, that is just plain wrong in so many ways I don't know where to start. My third and fourth pennies: "frequently have numerous quick e-mails back and forth with my clients" I tell my clients constantly, "Use the right tool for the job." Chat is chat, email is email. Install phpChat onto your site so that those quick communiques may be facilitated. "I should not be able to have instant e-mail on a free service like Yahoo and have considerably worse and infrequent service on a web host and domain that I pay for" My opinion is just the opposite. Because Yahoo does things like that, they create an instability for all users. I see the TCH move here as being protective. Protecting the server stability for the good of all. THAT is what you are paying for. MY opinions. Lianna Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayman_ Posted March 15, 2003 Author Share Posted March 15, 2003 Maybe musicfrisk should read the free email based services TOS - By the way yahoo does not provide FREE SMTP & POP3 email accounts. Here are some quotes from yahoo's TOS - 11. GENERAL PRACTICES REGARDING USE AND STORAGE You acknowledge that Yahoo may establish general practices and limits concerning use of the Service, including without limitation the maximum number of days that email messages, message board postings or other uploaded Content will be retained by the Service, the maximum number of email messages that may be sent from or received by an account on the Service, the maximum size of any email message that may be sent from or received by an account on the Service, the maximum disk space that will be allotted on Yahoo's servers on your behalf, and the maximum number of times (and the maximum duration for which) you may access the Service in a given period of time. You agree that Yahoo has no responsibility or liability for the deletion or failure to store any messages and other communications or other Content maintained or transmitted by the Service. You acknowledge that Yahoo reserves the right to log off accounts that are inactive for an extended period of time. You further acknowledge that Yahoo reserves the right to change these general practices and limits at any time, in its sole discretion, with or without notice. OH here is a little tid bit from HOTMAIL - Can I use Hotmail as a business address? No, you may not use your Hotmail address as your primary business address. If, however, you work for a company with which you have an e-mail address and you want to use your Hotmail account to send and receive e-mail while you are away from your office computer, you may do so. and dont overlook this one from hotmail - Can I send and receive attachments with Hotmail? If you have a free Hotmail account, you can send and receive messages up to 1 megabyte (MB) in size including attachments. oh oh look at this one from hotmail - How much e-mail storage space do I get with Hotmail? Hotmail gives you 2 megabytes (MB) of storage space when you store your messages and attachments on Hotmail servers. If you do not keep your account below this limit, Hotmail may remove some messages and their attachments. Messages and attachments removed by Hotmail cannot be recovered. To avoid exceeding the storage limit, we recommend that you save large attachments in a folder on your hard disk. REMOVE MY EMAILS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted March 15, 2003 Share Posted March 15, 2003 Just a couple of things, in response to musicfrisk's question, Horde does allow you to change the intervals it checks for new mail, just go to the options then "new mail" which is in the right hand column. I am comfortable with 1 min checks, and usually set all my mail programs to do so. The difference is I don't stay logged into them for long periods. Usually just a few minutes at a time. If it helps server traffic, why not implement it. The only people I can see the suggested times hurting are the spammers and they don't need to be here anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkwoof Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 I am comfortable with 1 min checks, and usually set all my mail programs to do so. The difference is I don't stay logged into them for long periods. Usually just a few minutes at a time. If it helps server traffic, why not implement it. The only people I can see the suggested times hurting are the spammers and they don't need to be here anyway. Personally I wouldn't have a problem with the restriction most of the time since I do my mail checks manually only every couple of hours. But matt, you do seem to be forgetting the needs of us PHP script developers. Some of us do, during periods of development and testing, need to check our mailboxes multiple times in a short while, to tweak and make sure our scripts are working well. (Just about last month I was upgrading my website for my Corps, a division of a non-profit uniformed brigade, and I needed to check my mail to see if my new Feedback Form, Volunteer Registrations, as well as RSVP system are working well -- all were custom developed, one of the reason why we chose PHP and a host that supports PHP) The sooner we can get it right, the sooner we can move on to other scripts and not need to test the mail functions that much. Then again, spammers don't check mail that often; they send them. They're not the problems when it comes to setting a time limit for mail check. It is the people who bogs down the server continually by checking mail that's causing a problem. On another note, I see you have Bucky Katt as an avatar... I absolutely loves Get Fuzzy! I read the comics everynight on their web site. My favourite character's Satchel Pooch though... He's so naive at times its adorable... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sully Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 I agree completely with Darkwoof -- spammers are SENDING large amounts of email, and quite frequently. I have multiple things going on with a couple of lines of business throughout the day, and I need to be able to check email automatically -- sometimes I don't have the ability to quit what I'm doing and do a manual email check. I have my Outlook set up to check for mail every 1 or 2 minutes, which I think is reasonable. Having said that, I suppose I would be OK with a 30 second limit being placed on the servers, and having some further review of how this policy has affected the user community. I DON'T like having an arbitrary number foisted upon me, thus affecting how I operate my business; I agree that we all share resources here, but we are also paying for them. Yahoo and Hotmail (both of which I use to sign up for various kinds of emails, etc -- in an effort to have only those email addresses receiving spam) are free and therefore it is reasonable to see where they put certain limitations on their customers. After all, you get what you pay for!! Just one more user, piling on!! Sully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musicfrisk Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 Anything longer than that makes me seriously question Total Choice's commitment to being a top-tier small business webhost - as I frequently have numerous quick e-mails back and forth with my clients. I should not be able to have instant e-mail on a free service like Yahoo and have considerably worse and infrequent service on a web host and domain that I pay for, that is just plain wrong in so many ways I don't know where to start. My third and fourth pennies: "frequently have numerous quick e-mails back and forth with my clients" I tell my clients constantly, "Use the right tool for the job." Chat is chat, email is email. Install phpChat onto your site so that those quick communiques may be facilitated. "I should not be able to have instant e-mail on a free service like Yahoo and have considerably worse and infrequent service on a web host and domain that I pay for" My opinion is just the opposite. Because Yahoo does things like that, they create an instability for all users. I see the TCH move here as being protective. Protecting the server stability for the good of all. THAT is what you are paying for. MY opinions. Lianna These are professional business people, e-mail *is* the right and only tool for this, thank you. Maybe if you actually used things in an actual business setting you would suggest something so laughable. Most, if not all, of these people would be considered goofing off by their employers if chat was found in thier daily internet usage logs. I'm not going to suggest to people that they get fired because my web host desires to avoid handling a problem properly. Thanks for the suggestion, but it like the proposal, it is completely unacceptable. If you want to add more harsh language to deter spammers and then act upon it so that Total Choice is not the spammers host of choice, that is great and the proper road here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sully Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 In Lianna's defense, she does do a LOT of business! AND, she does a LOT here to help all of us users. Just wanted to make sure we keep it nice! However, I do feel the need to add something else which I forgot to add in my previous post. A lot of people have made some good points here, and there were a few other comments made that I wanted to respond to. 1. Lianna, installing phpChat may be a good option for some, more advanced users, but there are those of us (myself included) who have neither the knowledge nor the time to learn how to implement and then implement these kinds of "workarounds." Don't get me wrong, I want to learn these things because it will allow me to offer a more robust environment for my visitors, but right now my website is primarily for informational purposes, and then I communicate by phone or email. Email is the conduit of choice, because as a very small business with clients all over the country, I save a considerable amount of money on long-distance bills! Also, when utilizing something like chat, you limit your ability to be discerning in regards to whom you respond. EVERYONE can see that you are online, while with email, you can pick and choose your responses, which is very effective for time management. Also, as someone who wants to learn how to do these things that will be space/time/bandwidth savers in the future, I need to be able to play with this stuff now. Learning scripts and whatnot is not an easy thing for me, so being able to test the new stuff "fairly" frequently would be of great benefit. 2. KW -- having worked in the past for Verizon (both in operations and legal/regulatory affairs) part of the reason they put policies like that in place is because their first obligation is to their VOICE customers, which is a heavily regulated part of the business. Network management for them is almost a fractal exercise, when you add things like video-on-demand (one of my old projects) to the mix! Also, for those of us who opted to pay for high-speed lines (in an effort to not have email downloads take multiple minutes) we would potentially have that benefit of speed obviated by someone else's thoughts of what is "reasonable." 3. Have the individuals who are doing the 1-30 second email checks been contacted? I want to make certain we as a community (which is why I'm here) are proactive in seeking out the abusers and trying to get them to stop, BEFORE we impose limitations that affect everyone, possibly to some users' detriment. 4. I don't have a problem with limiting outgoing email, with one exception; I'm VERY sensitive to being called a spammer (as bethohio can attest -- I got a little cranky with her when I felt she implied that I was a spammer -- sorry Beth!). I have a rather large (over 1,000) mailing list, and I send them a monthly newsletter, as well as the occassional info piece about new happenings. These are ALL opt-in recipients. Admittedly, I use a lot of bandwidth when I send some things out, but it is no more than a once a week thing. However, under some people's propositions, I potentially wouldn't be able to get that info to my users in a timely fashion, which I find completely unacceptable. If I wanted to have severe limitations placed on me from those "on high," I would have stayed with someone like Verizon. Oh yeah, that's right...I CAN'T STAND Verizon!! Sorry for the diatribe, but I needed to address these issues more fully. Sully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lianna Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 These are professional business people, e-mail *is* the right and only tool for this, thank you. Maybe if you actually used things in an actual business setting you would suggest something so laughable. Most, if not all, of these people would be considered goofing off by their employers if chat was found in thier daily internet usage logs. I'm not going to suggest to people that they get fired because my web host desires to avoid handling a problem properly. Thanks for the suggestion, but it like the proposal, it is completely unacceptable. Hang on, now, I was in no way intending to degrade or offend. I am a professional that runs her own business and has many clients. I use chat for support with a great majority of my clients and they absolutely love the instantaneous responses and real dialog that is offered by the option. If handled properly in a work environment, it can and is a serious and professional solution. (And yes, this is WAY off base since you know nothing of me or my activities: "Maybe if you actually used things in an actual business setting you would suggest something so laughable.") If people would run the risk of being fired because of a chat with you then certainly, the emails they are depending upon are also not of a work related nature....I don't see the difference and it becomes their employers' issue. I do have some very frequent emailing that happens and I'm not at all in favor of limiting the email in such a way that would inhibit my ability to do my business. However, I am in favor of my host providing me with the best and most reasonable all-around solutions that benefit the whole. If I wanted or needed complete control, I'd have my own server and manage it myself. Lianna Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TCH-Andy Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 Can I send a big smile before this topic gets out of hand As far as I can tell everyone has valid points. There are times when some of us need to send significant quantities of email (not spam) and check email frequently (when developing scripts for example) and there are bosses & companies who don't understand that chat is not just a play thing, but an appropriate tool for some business purposes. Equally, we need to find some way of stopping server overload by a few people who check their email every few seconds. It may just be me reading the thread - I usually manage to read things wrongly but it seems to be getting close to an argument about some points rather than suggesting solutions. How about; 1. checking with the people that were sending POP3 requests frequently to see why? Probably an oversght in many cases and a request to set it to every 5 minutes may solve the problem. Yes, I know that is extra work, but if it solves the poblem... 2. How about a vote with options for say 1 sec "I'm happy with a slower server", 15secs, 30 secs, 1 min, 5 mins? 3. Can you set a daily limit? That way those of us that have automatics set to 30 mins, but occasionally want very rapid turn round when testing scripts etc are not affected? It shouldn't affect those who sent weekly news letters to 1000 folk either. 4. Move all the people who hammer the servers onto a single server betwen them , ok, maybe not the best suggestion, but I couldn't resist Come on team, how about a few more constructive (or downright silly suggestions) Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head Guru Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 I think its time for me to chime in. There are times when a thread should run its course and there are times when one should not. Let me start by saying "Props to ayman". He was told to implement a pop3 flood program and he tried to do it the right way. But certain users are not being reasonable. Here is the bottom line. There will be a pop3 flood program put in place, I will make the final choice on what parameters it will involve. I will support and back my support staff 100% when they are correct. Guess what guys, they are correct. Over 70% of incoming traffic to our servers are for pop3 connections. Hmmm, that should be more like 30%. Users that check their mail every 5, 10 , 30 seconds or 45 seconds are causing the servers to slow down, they are causing high loads and so on. Oh ok, so one relpy says "you should only punish them", have you ever in your life done server admin? Sure we can apply client by client rules when we have 100 domains, but we have THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of domains. So here is what happens. I say ok lets spend hours and hours and hours and apply rules to the abusers. Then what happens? Everything else suffers. The same person complaining about the pop3 limits will start bitching about the lack or response time on his help desk ticket. This is a no win for my staff and I. I run a very large business with THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of clients and email is my lifeline. I do not believe for one second that any harm would come to my business if I could only check email every 1 or 2 minutes verse every 5 seconds. For the naysayers, well... there will always be naysayers. If you want to control your server then maybe you should take a look at our dedicated server offerings. This is what will take place. If pop3 traffic doesnt decrease in the next ten days, we will implement the following. A limit to the number of time per hour that pop3 email can be checked. So if we set that number to 13 - check it 13 times per hour. If we set that number to 60 - go for it 60 times an hour. Also there will be a limit to the number of OUTGOING emails per hour. If we set it to 1000 then you can send 1000 emails per hour If its 5000 then you can send 5000 per hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sully Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 I must say Bill, that I'm disappointed with the heavy-handedness of your last reply. One of the reasons I joined the TCH family was because of the great level of community, especially that expressed through the boards. Your last reply sounded like Verizon, not TCH. Oh and by the way, even Verizon doesn't have a limit on the number of times you can check your email. I still maintain one account through them, only because I've had it for nearly 10 years, and everyone I know knows that address -- which makes it easy for people to contact me who've lost touch. I have it set to check every 2 minutes, and haven't had any problems. I think AndyB made an EXCELLENT point when asking if people who are abusing could be contacted BEFORE we implement these kinds of "rules." I believe I made a similar point -- although it may have been lost in the length of my discourse! This doesn't go into the whole thing about people complaining about being able to check every 10 seconds. Rather, I am speaking about many people who have posted here asking for some reasonable actions to be taken, and the tenor of your last message just shot those trying to be reasonable and helpful right to he##. Not a good feeling for someone who was trying to offer helpful solutions without having the company shout us down!! Of course there will always be trade-offs, but I believe it is important that, if one of your selling attributes is the "community" atmosphere of your service,then you should in fact embrace that community when it comes to these kinds of things. Yes, you have a business to run, as do most of us. Have I been a server admin? Yes, a LONG time ago, with WinNT...a task I NEVER want to do again!! That is why I am here. Having run very, very large organizations myself in the past, I recognize the inherant problems associated with volume; however, let me reiterate...one of the selling attributes here is community! I hope we don't lose sight of that -- it would be a shame. Sully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sully Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 Before I forget, let me add that I do agree with you 100% when you said that what Ayman was talking about was right on! Again, one of the nice things about being here is the fact that people like Ayman and Lianna throw things out for discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head Guru Posted March 16, 2003 Share Posted March 16, 2003 This thread is closed. I agree with 99% of everything that is said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts