AOL Non-Lameness

Tue Oct 3 00:11:32 UTC 2006

On 2 Oct 2006, at 23:39, Rick Kunkel wrote:

>
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006, Joseph S D Yao wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 02, 2006 at 11:53:56PM +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian  
>> wrote:
>> ...
>>> Drew the attention of a friend at AOL to this and got a reply quoted
>>> below - this was apparently an issue at AOL's end. Thanks to AOL for
>>> quickly acting to fix this.
>>>
>>> I've been asked by my friend to post this below
>>>
>>> srs
>>>
>>> [quote]
>>>
>>> We found a problem with the way URL's were being identified and have
>>> undergone steps to correct it.  In the interim, the rule change has
>>> been backed out pending further testing.  Thanks to all on the list.
>>>
>>> [unquote]
>>
>>
>> All, this seems seriously NON-lame to me.  Of course, testing and  
>> fixing
>> the bug before it was put out there would have been less so.  But  
>> think
>> of this!  A large company has actually admitted that it was wrong and
>> backed out a problem!  Isn't this what everyone always complains  
>> SHOULD
>> be done?  ;-)  ;-)  ;-)
>>
>> Me, I'm always doing it, but that's just 'cause I have to.  ;-)
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Joe Yao
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>> --
>>    This message is not an official statement of OSIS Center policies.
>>
>
> I had users that appeared to be getting their email blocked seemingly
> because in their sigs, they write their phone number that stupid
> IP-Address-Wannabe method, like:
>
> 206.555.1212
>
> As an aside, is this something that's the norm in other places, like
> commas instead of periods for decimals in other countries?  I'd  
> hate to
> sound critical if it was.

Normal practice in France; Belgium too I think.

> It just seems that I know a large amount of
> very American people who have decided that phone numbers with  
> periods in
> them somehow look more "hip" than dashes.  I despise that.  Can you  
> tell?
> ;)
>
> --Rick Kunkel
>