Arc - !Store

Thanks Steve! :)

Question about csa announce,
is it for Acorn only related systems or is it also for the 32bit only/RISC OS 5.x ?

It’s for anything Acorn or RISC OS related no matter how modern or retro!

cool thanks Andrew! :)

I remember the blood, sweat and tears it took to get a place in the usenet big 8, not that anyone would care now, but lets keep using it.

sure, when will have new software/articles/material for RISC OS will send the announcement also on csa :)

I looked into this for WROCC and show announcements. For a bunch of reasons, it very quickly revealed itself to be a Very Bad Idea.

When I commented about using an internal distribution list for sending out announcements – and noted that this is something I used to do – I was thinking more about software than show and meetings (and the people I’ve mentioned this to previously AFAICR were all releasing software, and not involved with meetings/shows).

Back when I used to do it, I wasn’t sending out announcements myself for a local group meeting – and at the time, rather than being a Very Bad Idea, it actually worked rather well.

But for the specific use cases you mention, I can indeed see pitfalls.

However

I’ve got one of those coming as well.

much it might superficially look as if one email will do them all, even a quick review of what one plans to send out will reveal this not to be the case.
And in the time it takes to get a bodged wording that will work for all destinations, separate emails could have been sent.

Yes, I can see your problem, because I’ve seen both general announcements from WROCC, as well as member announcements, which do indeed differ. Similarly with ROUGOL as well – and in the case of BRU, the ‘internal’ group announcement isn’t even an announcement, rather an attempt to get a discussion going ahead of the general announcement to see if there’s anything worth mentioning.

Thinking on it further, I can see other problems and pitfalls; if I was to set up my system to do this now, I’d include the WebChange mailing list, for example, and when I then used the announcement distribution list to announce a Bristol RISC OS Users meeting, that would go to the WebChange mailing list, which I wouldn’t want. Similarly, if I was to include the BRU list and send the formal announcements there, when I release a new build of WebChange, I’d be sending an announcement to the usual places, the WebChange list… and the BRU list. Oops.

One solution would be different internal distribution lists for different types of announcement, but amongst other things that means maintaining those lists – if a new outlet appears or one closes (e.g. I get so fed up with RISC OS types steadfastly refusing to give up their foot-gun that I decide to close RISCOSitory) all of those internal lists need updating.

However… ;)

I’ve thought of a solution that will work for me, and if you put your mind to it, would probably work for you if you did similar.

When I next have an announcement to send out, it will come from an online system that I will set up especially for the purpose. I’ll be able to choose the type of announcement, and this will then give me a selection of destinations to which it will be sent.

I’ll fill in a text field with the announcement itself.

I’ll click send, and the job will be done.

Going further, it could also use a template system as well – so, for example, if I’m announcing a new version of WebChange, most of the standard blurb can be pulled from a template specific to that, if I’m announcing a BRU meeting, most of the standard text can be pulled from a template specific to that.

In fact, if I’m announcing a BRU meeting, I see no reason why – if sensibly written – the system can’t send two or more announcements to two or more different sets of addresses, using two or more templates.

These things can be done. All it needs is for the people who could benefit from them to sit down and think about how to go about doing it in a way that suits their own requirements.

Don’t think “this is a Very Bad Idea” and think “how can I make this a good idea that works for me”.

When I next have an announcement to send out, it will come from an online system that I will set up especially for the purpose. I’ll be able to choose the type of announcement, and this will then give me a selection of destinations to which it will be sent.

Oh, !Multi-mailer

Well, no; I said my next announcement would come from an online system.

I’m not familiar with this Multi-Mailer, though. Its name suggests it might be a RISC OS app that does some/all of what I’m talking about (but it’s also possible that it does a similar, related thing but can’t be used for what I described).

Now, am I unfamiliar with it because it’s something old, and long forgotten

Or is it something new where its own developer hasn’t used it for the purpose I described?

A quick search before I go out hasn’t turned it up.

bq.

Furtle Fertile imagination.

Oh, I see. It was a suggestion. :)

If I did write something for RISC OS, I’d probably go with MultEmail for a name – but I don’t think I’ll bother. A RISC OS only solution wouldn’t be practical for me – something I can access from anywhere, on any device, would be more useful to me for purposes beyond the RISC OS world.

It’s worth noting, as well, that for the ‘simpler’ solution – along the lines of what I used to do – there’s already a suitable application for RISC OS from Sine Nomine: ImpEmail. That’s probably less than ideal for some situations, such as those highlighted by Steve – but would be fine for others.

(Or possibly would be once they’ve made it easy – or was it easier?¹ – to use different headers, like BCC).

¹ Check the video of their talk at the recent WROCC meeting. Someone asked about Reply-To IIRC, but Matthew then went on to mention other headers.

I switched off, then I realised I was wrong in my previous post.

Forget the bit about BCC – because ImpEmail does a mail merge on the email body as well as the headers; so it must send individual emails; BCC is therefore irrelevant. It’s already suitable.

I believe I have a copy because it comes with Impact (though not the most up to date version – I ought to upgrade).

I may as well put my money where my mouth is and try using actually using it for the basic purpose I’ve described, in order to prove a point!

If I move it from my ARMX6 to VA on my main laptop, as well, while it’s a far cry from being usable from any device I use, it’s available from the one I’m likely to have handy most often.

And – a facepalm moment – during Matthew’s talk, I was commenting in the side chat about a client of mine that needed to do something that (if I can get them to change one aspect) ImpEmail should be able to handle with ease. And I’ve had it all along. Oops. :/