I have the questionable pleasure of experiencing a deluge of backscatter since the rise of the Festi botnet, and I must say that I find the lack of sanity checks on automated replies appalling. It is not a courtesy to autorespond to spam by sending the spam "back" to a person who didn't send it in the first place and gave you all the information you need to clearly and easily establish that fact (Domainkeys / SPF).
There is only one place for automatically sending a message back to the original sender, and that's before accepting the mail in the first place. The sender sends the address information first. Reject the email then and there and include your out of office information with the bounce. Once you've accepted the mail, don't autorespond.
I agree about companies needing to push SPF and the like more. Sure, it still can cause some headache supporting.. but it helps address the problem.
As for the second bit, you've got to be joking. First, putting the out of office in the bounceback does nothing to mitigate the issue. You're still receiving an email for each and every bounced email. Second, millions of people have email that is hosted through another company. They realistically cannot set up individual bouncebacks for every single customer.
In one breath you are labelling people who use IM "passive aggressive" (are they really?) and in the next you seem to be advocating getting rid of the phone for other methods of communication (including IM). That doesn't make much sense at all. Also, why does using IM mean or imply as person is passive aggressive. Do you actually know what passive aggressive is, or is it just a buzzword for you? I ask because if someone were truly passive aggressive they probably wouldn't include you in the IM at all.
I can't speak for the poster, but he said his passive aggressive co-workers use IM. He didn't actually call IM users passive aggressive. There is a distinct difference between those two statements.
I can't see how one can reasonably include overhead that's suffered only on the first hop into the "traffic" measurement.
It's easier to see if you're getting paid more for it.
So he ends up with a bit over AUD $425k (USD $441) for his trouble.
I find the lack of "k" in the USD humorous.. completely untrue, but humorous.
Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.