Of my mild jeremiad on attachments, Alice Macpherson writes,
"I do understand that this list has forbidden them, and I have no problem
with this. . . . However, I don't think that you can speak about or for the
whole electronic world. . . . What is painful to me is the _tone_ with
which those who do not follow the rules on this list are denigrated."
There must be lists where the policies differ. I can imagine carefully
controlled lists that use attachments. I don't belong to any of them. The
universities that host the lists to which I subscribe all state "no
attachments sent to list." So do the other list hosts through which I
subscribe, such as Mailbase in the UK. I wasn't speaking for the whole
Internet world. I reported the policy in the many parts with which I
interact. This includes lists generated in Scandinavia, the US, the UK,
Canada and Australia.
Perhaps I should have been gentler in my last paragraph. On the other hand,
this issue has been discussed carefully, rationally and in polite, gentle
tones. I understand the problems that arise when a colleague connected by
slow modem over a copper wire is forced to download a massive attachment.
Today's technology is such that one can't merely delete a clunky attached
file. It chokes the pipe to create a bottleneck. Until one downloads it --
however much time it takes, including the need to contact the ISP in some
cases - one cannot get any other mail nor perform any other email related
work.
I did not "denigrate" anyone. I didn't cast aspersions on or defame anyone.
I used irony and mild sarcasm to reprimand thoughtless behavior on an issue
that has been discussed at great length on this list. The problem is not
that this behavior was a breach of the rules of this list. This behavior
caused real problems for members of this list. These problems don't arise
when the needs represented by list rules are given due respect.
When I posted my note yesterday, I was working at my school in The
Norwegian School of Management. We have superb IT support and one of the
fastest Internet connections available. Today I'm working at my home office
in the Scandinavian countryside. I received today's MG-ED-DV digest over a
modem and a copper wire, and I respond by the same. A project grant would
pay for ISDN. The telephone company won't deliver it to my little village
here for another two to three years. The attachment that caused so much
trouble to our consternated colleague would have caused me the same problem
here.
Massive attachments can jam the connection and cause failure. It took me a
day to solve the problem of a massive jpeg conference brochure a few months
back. It came on a Scandinavian holiday and jammed my connection. The rest
of the world was working, and I needed to respond to some project queries.
I couldn't. The attachment wouldn't download and I couldn't remove it. I
had to contact the IT staff, ask someone to physically access my account
and delete it. I was disabled for nearly 24 hours during a vital project. I
spent a lot of time and long distance telephony solving the problem. It
would not have arisen if those who create large jpeg documents understood
that not all parts of the electronic world are physically able to work the
same way. In the words of one Internet wit, "The future is here already --
it's just not evenly distributed."
I observe that Alice Macpherson writes from Kwantlen University College.
Her college supports advanced IT services up to and including online
education. She may therefore not be aware of what life is like for some of
our colleagues. If she does most of her work from campus or over ISDN, she
may not be aware of the challenges that massive attachments offer when
communicating over ordinary telephone lines. Most Word documents work well
enough, but large documents with many pictures or text treated as images
creates problems.
At a certain point, people have a right to be annoyed. If I had been
blockaded by the attachment in question, I might well have moved beyond
irony to denigration. As it was, I denigrated no one and my tone was ironic
rather than harsh.
Responding to my vision of the future fat-pipe infrastructure, Jay Warner
writes,
"And when that day comes, we will send fat graphics laden files that clog
the fat pipes like cholesterol in old arteries. There's no winning this
one, gang."
Of today's world, he concludes:
"And don't attach clunky files, please. If you want people to feel
positively toward your endeavor, why would you p--s on them?"
Those who know their wine know the Jeroboam as an oversized bottle. It is
not entirely unlike a large, overfilled attachment. Those who remember
their Bible history will recall the fate of Jeroboam, to whom a prophecy
was sent in I Kings 14:10:
"I will bring evil upon the house of Jeroboam,
and will cut off from Jeroboam him that p--seth against the wall."
It wouldn't do to push the Bible analogy too far, but Jay Warner's query -
"why would you p--s on them?" - deserves consideration.
Sinners, take warning!
Ken Friedman, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Leadership and Strategic Design
Department of Knowledge Management
Norwegian School of Management
+47 22.98.51.07 Direct line
+47 22.98.51.11 Telefax
Home office:
+46 (46) 53.245 Telephone
+46 (46) 53.345 Telefax
email:
ken.friedman@bi.no