Thanks for Joining Tech OnTap!

[NetApp]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

View on Mobile Phone | View as Web Page

Dear Toasters,

Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.

You will begin to receive Tech OnTap communications in the next few weeks. In the meantime, I invite you to browse the articles, tips, and tools available in the Tech OnTap archive.

And - to thank you for your membership - here is your first "member-only" benefit: the latest Tech OnTap Magazine, where you can catch up on a collection of our best articles.

Welcome to Tech OnTap!

Dave Hitz Founder and Executive Vice President NetApp

       © 2009 NetApp | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe | Update My Profile | Contact Us

495 E. Java Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA

You are receiving this e-mail at toasters@... because you joined Tech OnTap.

[Hitz, Dave]

Some parts of this message have been removed. Learn more about Nabble's security policy.

I’m sorry about this folks. This is a message that is only supposed to go to people as the OPT IN to our Tech OnTap mailing list. It shouldn’t go to anyone who hasn’t opted in, and it certainly shouldn’t be getting sent repeatedly to a giant mailing list!

 

I’m trying to hunt down what happened and fix it.

 

Dave

 

 

 

From: NetApp [mailto:mail@...]
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 2:35 PM
To: toasters@...
Subject: Thanks for Joining Tech OnTap!

 

View on Mobile Phone | View as Web Page

 

 

Dear Toasters,

Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.

You will begin to receive Tech OnTap communications in the next few weeks. In the meantime, I invite you to browse the articles, tips, and tools available in the Tech OnTap archive.

And - to thank you for your membership - here is your first "member-only" benefit: the latest Tech OnTap Magazine, where you can catch up on a collection of our best articles.

Welcome to Tech OnTap!

Dave Hitz Founder and Executive Vice President NetApp

 

       © 2009 NetApp | Privacy Policy | Unsubscribe | Update My Profile | Contact Us

495 E. Java Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA

 

You are receiving this e-mail at toasters@... because you joined Tech OnTap.

[Jan Pieter Cornet]

On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 05:35:12PM -0400, NetApp wrote:

> Dear Toasters,
> Dear Toasters,
> Dear Toasters,
> Dear Toasters,
> Dear Toasters,
>
> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.
> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.
> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.
> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.

Erm... this is a _VERY_, _VERY_ bad idea! While I would recommend
everyone on this list to subscribe to the Tech Ontap program, it's in
general a bad idea to subscribe mailinglists to mailinglists. And these
few messages show why.

Can the toasters listmom please ban the tech ontap mails
(mail@...), at least temporarily?

> You are receiving this e-mail at toasters@... because you joined Tech OnTap.    

Maybe, but I just unsubscribed. According to the webpage, that requires
confirmation and may take up to 10 days to be processed. I do hope we're
not going to enjoy these welcome messages for 10 days.

Is it just me, or did Netapp really lose more than half of their email
clue the last few years?

--
Jan-Pieter Cornet <johnpc@...>
!! Disclamer: The addressee of this email is not the intended recipient. !!
!! This is only a test of the echelon and data retention systems. Please !!
!! archive this message indefinitely to allow verification of the logs.  !!

[Hitz, Dave]

> Is it just me, or did Netapp really lose more than half of their email
> clue the last few years?

I can't comment on our "percent email clue", but I can tell you what
happened.

Apparently a NetApp sales rep submitted a list of customers who wanted
to be added to the Tech OnTap mailing list, and they put
"toasters@..." as the email address for all of them.

This raises all sorts of embarrassing questions. Like: Why would the rep
put the wrong address on them? And even though that's admittedly hard to
catch, why wouldn't we dedup the list, so that only one thank you went
out instead of many? How can we make sure this never happens again?

I can assure you that these questions and others are being urgently
discussed by the Tech OnTap team right at this moment.

Actually, those questions are mostly being deferred till later while
they try to make sure that the spam to toasters has stopped. They think
they've got it stopped at the source, but it's possible that there are
some intermediate points where things queue up, so they're trying to
figure out if that's true and -- if so -- how to drain them as well.

Again, I'm sorry.

Dave
 


-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Pieter Cornet [mailto:johnpc@...]
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 3:42 PM
To: toasters@...
Subject: Re: Thanks for Joining Tech OnTap!

On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 05:35:12PM -0400, NetApp wrote:

> Dear Toasters,
> Dear Toasters,
> Dear Toasters,
> Dear Toasters,
> Dear Toasters,
>
> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.
> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.
> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.
> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.

Erm... this is a _VERY_, _VERY_ bad idea! While I would recommend
everyone on this list to subscribe to the Tech Ontap program, it's in
general a bad idea to subscribe mailinglists to mailinglists. And these
few messages show why.

Can the toasters listmom please ban the tech ontap mails
(mail@...), at least temporarily?

> You are receiving this e-mail at toasters@... because you
joined Tech OnTap.    

Maybe, but I just unsubscribed. According to the webpage, that requires
confirmation and may take up to 10 days to be processed. I do hope we're
not going to enjoy these welcome messages for 10 days.

Is it just me, or did Netapp really lose more than half of their email
clue the last few years?

--
Jan-Pieter Cornet <johnpc@...>
!! Disclamer: The addressee of this email is not the intended recipient.
!!
!! This is only a test of the echelon and data retention systems. Please
!!
!! archive this message indefinitely to allow verification of the logs.
!!

[Maxwell Reid]

doh!

Reminds me of the old saying "To Err is Human, It takes automation to  
really screw things up.."

apologies in advance for top quoting!



~Max



On Oct 2, 2009, at 4:03 PM, Hitz, Dave wrote:

>> Is it just me, or did Netapp really lose more than half of their  
>> email
>> clue the last few years?
>
> I can't comment on our "percent email clue", but I can tell you what
> happened.
>
> Apparently a NetApp sales rep submitted a list of customers who wanted
> to be added to the Tech OnTap mailing list, and they put
> "toasters@..." as the email address for all of them.
>
> This raises all sorts of embarrassing questions. Like: Why would the  
> rep
> put the wrong address on them? And even though that's admittedly  
> hard to
> catch, why wouldn't we dedup the list, so that only one thank you went
> out instead of many? How can we make sure this never happens again?
>
> I can assure you that these questions and others are being urgently
> discussed by the Tech OnTap team right at this moment.
>
> Actually, those questions are mostly being deferred till later while
> they try to make sure that the spam to toasters has stopped. They  
> think
> they've got it stopped at the source, but it's possible that there are
> some intermediate points where things queue up, so they're trying to
> figure out if that's true and -- if so -- how to drain them as well.
>
> Again, I'm sorry.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Pieter Cornet [mailto:johnpc@...]
> Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 3:42 PM
> To: toasters@...
> Subject: Re: Thanks for Joining Tech OnTap!
>
> On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 05:35:12PM -0400, NetApp wrote:
>> Dear Toasters,
>> Dear Toasters,
>> Dear Toasters,
>> Dear Toasters,
>> Dear Toasters,
>>
>> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.
>> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.
>> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.
>> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.
>
> Erm... this is a _VERY_, _VERY_ bad idea! While I would recommend
> everyone on this list to subscribe to the Tech Ontap program, it's in
> general a bad idea to subscribe mailinglists to mailinglists. And  
> these
> few messages show why.
>
> Can the toasters listmom please ban the tech ontap mails
> (mail@...), at least temporarily?
>
>> You are receiving this e-mail at toasters@... because you
> joined Tech OnTap.
>
> Maybe, but I just unsubscribed. According to the webpage, that  
> requires
> confirmation and may take up to 10 days to be processed. I do hope  
> we're
> not going to enjoy these welcome messages for 10 days.
>
> Is it just me, or did Netapp really lose more than half of their email
> clue the last few years?
>
> --
> Jan-Pieter Cornet <johnpc@...>
> !! Disclamer: The addressee of this email is not the intended  
> recipient.
> !!
> !! This is only a test of the echelon and data retention systems.  
> Please
> !!
> !! archive this message indefinitely to allow verification of the  
> logs.
> !!
>

[Lori Barfield]

the things that go rong when you're maintaining mailing lists.  it's
only a few wasted electrons, dave, and those aren't an endangered
species.

...lori

[Nicholas Bernstein]

As someone who's run 10s of thousands of email systems, and spent a  
number of years working on preventing spam- this was pretty low on the  
stupid scale. I wouldn't spend too much time on the first two  
questions (I'm guessing the person responsible is suitably  
embarassed), or worrying about it too much, at all really, but  
submitting additions via a webapp that can sanity check things  
wouldn't hurt, and Its a great "give the interns something to do"  
project.

-nick
--
Sent from my mobile device

On Oct 2, 2009, at 4:03 PM, "Hitz, Dave" <Dave.Hitz@...> wrote:

>> Is it just me, or did Netapp really lose more than half of their  
>> email
>> clue the last few years?
>
> I can't comment on our "percent email clue", but I can tell you what
> happened.
>
> Apparently a NetApp sales rep submitted a list of customers who wanted
> to be added to the Tech OnTap mailing list, and they put
> "toasters@..." as the email address for all of them.
>
> This raises all sorts of embarrassing questions. Like: Why would the  
> rep
> put the wrong address on them? And even though that's admittedly  
> hard to
> catch, why wouldn't we dedup the list, so that only one thank you went
> out instead of many? How can we make sure this never happens again?
>
> I can assure you that these questions and others are being urgently
> discussed by the Tech OnTap team right at this moment.
>
> Actually, those questions are mostly being deferred till later while
> they try to make sure that the spam to toasters has stopped. They  
> think
> they've got it stopped at the source, but it's possible that there are
> some intermediate points where things queue up, so they're trying to
> figure out if that's true and -- if so -- how to drain them as well.
>
> Again, I'm sorry.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Pieter Cornet [mailto:johnpc@...]
> Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 3:42 PM
> To: toasters@...
> Subject: Re: Thanks for Joining Tech OnTap!
>
> On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 05:35:12PM -0400, NetApp wrote:
>> Dear Toasters,
>> Dear Toasters,
>> Dear Toasters,
>> Dear Toasters,
>> Dear Toasters,
>>
>> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.
>> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.
>> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.
>> Thank you for joining the NetApp Tech OnTap program.
>
> Erm... this is a _VERY_, _VERY_ bad idea! While I would recommend
> everyone on this list to subscribe to the Tech Ontap program, it's in
> general a bad idea to subscribe mailinglists to mailinglists. And  
> these
> few messages show why.
>
> Can the toasters listmom please ban the tech ontap mails
> (mail@...), at least temporarily?
>
>> You are receiving this e-mail at toasters@... because you
> joined Tech OnTap.
>
> Maybe, but I just unsubscribed. According to the webpage, that  
> requires
> confirmation and may take up to 10 days to be processed. I do hope  
> we're
> not going to enjoy these welcome messages for 10 days.
>
> Is it just me, or did Netapp really lose more than half of their email
> clue the last few years?
>
> --
> Jan-Pieter Cornet <johnpc@...>
> !! Disclamer: The addressee of this email is not the intended  
> recipient.
> !!
> !! This is only a test of the echelon and data retention systems.  
> Please
> !!
> !! archive this message indefinitely to allow verification of the  
> logs.
> !!
>

[Kevin Davis-5]

> As someone who's run 10s of thousands of email systems, and spent a number of
> years working on preventing spam- this was pretty low on the stupid scale. I
> wouldn't spend too much time on the first two questions (I'm guessing the
> person responsible is suitably embarassed), or worrying about it too much, at
> all really, but submitting additions via a webapp that can sanity check
> things wouldn't hurt, and Its a great "give the interns something to do"
> project.

Agreed.  The number of messages was small-potatoes in the grand scheme of
things. "delete" works just fine.

And folks, let's hear it for NetApp responding from Dave Hitz's level to
something like this; I hardly think we could expect the same from that other
storage vendor should the same type of thing originate from their domain.
Thanks, Dave, for responding so quickly and taking the time to explain.

Now, can we get SMB2.x support built in to 8.0.x? ;)

*------------------------------------------*-----------------------*
| Kevin Davis (UNIX/Storage Sysadmin)      | Natick, Massachusetts |
| 508.647.7660                             |            01760-2098 |
| mailto:kevin.davis@...         *-----------------------*
| http://www.mathworks.com                 |                       |
*------------------------------------------*-----------------------*

[Dave Minor]

Delete

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 19, 2009, at 11:18 AM, Kevin Davis <kdavis@...> wrote:



As someone who's run 10s of thousands of email systems, and spent a number of years working on preventing spam- this was pretty low on the stupid scale. I wouldn't spend too much time on the first two questions (I'm guessing the person responsible is suitably embarassed), or worrying about it too much, at all really, but submitting additions via a webapp that can sanity check things wouldn't hurt, and Its a great "give the interns something to do" project.

Agreed.  The number of messages was small-potatoes in the grand scheme of things. "delete" works just fine.

And folks, let's hear it for NetApp responding from Dave Hitz's level to something like this; I hardly think we could expect the same from that other storage vendor should the same type of thing originate from their domain. Thanks, Dave, for responding so quickly and taking the time to explain.

Now, can we get SMB2.x support built in to 8.0.x? ;)

*------------------------------------------*-----------------------*
| Kevin Davis (UNIX/Storage Sysadmin)      | Natick, Massachusetts |
| 508.647.7660                             |            01760-2098 |
| mailto:kevin.davis@...         *-----------------------*
| http://www.mathworks.com                 |                       |
*------------------------------------------*-----------------------*