With all due respect, I can't believe that anyone would advocate forcing
users to DO SOMETHING that compromises the organization's information
management policies and practices, operational needs, or compliance with
regulatory or statutory requirements. 

I agree that Exchange isn't the solution for storing emails - in fact I
argue in the course that the best bet is putting messages to be managed in
an ERMS, followed by an email archival solution or an EDMS. Even the email
archival solutions that use journaling to capture every email are in my
opinion better than doing nothing and MUCH better than setting arbitrary
size (or age) limits. Users will either figure a way around them, which is
bad, or they will blindly adhere to them through extensive use of the Delete
key, which is probably worse. 

And I certainly wouldn't consider a refusal to support such artificial
limits as "abdication in advising the organization on best practices" -
given that arguably the solution described is not a best practice. 

I can only imagine the discussion in the courtroom where a user, IT person,
or RM person has to justify deletion of emails relevant to litigation
because the email boxes were too small. If that's not the case, how would
you reconcile the limited email inbox size with a lit hold preventing
deletion of messages? I certainly hope the answer isn't "print & file"....

Jesse Wilkins
[log in to unmask]

List archives at
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]