- Some people expect that a reply will goto the group.
However, this causes a number of people to respond to the group when they mean the response to goto the sender only.
Of the 40 or so mailing lists that I'm regularly a participant on, the wlug list is the only one exhibiting this behavior. It's generally consider an anachronism, dating to the days when we all had "!" in our email addresses. decvax!ccb
At 8/20/2001 11:53 AM (Monday), ccb@acm.org wrote:
- Some people expect that a reply will goto the group.
However, this causes a number of people to respond to the group when they mean the response to goto the sender only.
Of the 40 or so mailing lists that I'm regularly a participant on, the wlug list is the only one exhibiting this behavior. It's generally consider an anachronism, dating to the days when we all had "!" in our email addresses.
Of the 15 or so mailing lists that I'm regularly a participant on, there are NO lists which are setup so replies go directly to senders instead of the list as a whole. Replying by default only to senders hinders one of the primary benefits of participation - that of sharing info. It is generally considered "the way to go" to have replies default to the whole list with strong objections made every time it is suggested that it be changed.
Ok this is a list serve isn't it? -=>Viper<=- Quoting ccb@acm.org:
- Some people expect that a reply will goto the group.
However, this causes a number of people to respond to the group when they mean the response to goto the sender only.
Of the 40 or so mailing lists that I'm regularly a participant on, the wlug list is the only one exhibiting this behavior. It's generally consider an anachronism, dating to the days when we all had "!" in our email addresses.
decvax!ccb
_______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug@mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug
Doug Chamberlin <DChamberlin@ne.mediaone.net> writes:
Of the 15 or so mailing lists that I'm regularly a participant on, there are NO lists which are setup so replies go directly to senders instead of the list as a whole. Replying by default only to senders hinders one of the primary benefits of participation - that of sharing info. It is generally considered "the way to go" to have replies default to the whole list with strong objections made every time it is suggested that it be changed.
Which is interesting. This is the only list I'm on that has broken reply-to. (handy that I can turn on the "broken reply-to" for this list with my MUA, so it does replies properly -- to the SENDER). For more information: http://www.halisp.net/halisp/reply-to-harmful.html What about the case where the sender would prefer replies to go to a different address? I wonder if the list software will overwrite that field? (bad!) -- Josh Huber
I sent my reply, not because I care strongly one way or the other, but because I didn't want the subject to be too one-sided (since the original message was so strong). There are two very legitimate sides to the debate. I once participated in a list which banned any form of quoting. They had a well considered rationale which included: 1) Replies would be more considered when the writer had to restate the item being replied to. 2) Elimintated over-quoting and other lazy, off-hand replies. 3) Slows the pace of exchange just enough for reasonable reflection, retarding the heated build up of flames. Worked quite well. Would not be popular today.
Doug Chamberlin said:
At 8/20/2001 11:53 AM (Monday), ccb@acm.org wrote:
- Some people expect that a reply will goto the group.
However, this causes a number of people to respond to the group when they mean the response to goto the sender only.
Of the 40 or so mailing lists that I'm regularly a participant on, the wlug list is the only one exhibiting this behavior. It's generally consider an anachronism, dating to the days when we all had "!" in our email addresses.
Of the 15 or so mailing lists that I'm regularly a participant on, there are NO lists which are setup so replies go directly to senders instead of the list as a whole. Replying by default only to senders hinders one of the primary benefits of participation - that of sharing info. It is generally considered "the way to go" to have replies default to the whole list with strong objections made every time it is suggested that it be changed.
i'm more familiar with this setup myself. mutt works nicely with mailing lists. i have "bind pager l list-reply" and "lists `cd ~/inboxes && echo *`" in my muttrc, and on most mailman mailing lists, i can just hit 'l' to reply to the list. if i hit 'r', it prompts me to reply to the list or the sender. just sharing :) -- Aaron Haviland orion [at] tribble [dot] dyndns [dot] org orion [at] parsed [dot] net Random #afda Quote #1: "Cool - my random quote is '"random quotes" is great'" - Tag
Aaron Haviland <orion@tribble.dyndns.org> writes:
i'm more familiar with this setup myself. mutt works nicely with mailing lists. i have "bind pager l list-reply" and "lists `cd ~/inboxes && echo *`" in my muttrc, and on most mailman mailing lists, i can just hit 'l' to reply to the list. if i hit 'r', it prompts me to reply to the list or the sender.
I'd like to point out that the whole purpose of list-reply in mutt is to reply to the list, and to have reply ("r") go to the author. Why bother having it prompt you if you can have "l" send a message to the list, and "r" send a message to the author? Having Reply-to point back at the mailing list is designed to compensate for other MUA's inability to distiguish between a reply and a followup. (*cough* Outlook *cough* pine *cough*) :) ttyl, -- Josh Huber
I'd just like to say this is my favorite thread in the world! :) You guys are all nuts... and I realize that having pedants like you is the reason everything works so well. I've never had that kind of energy, but from a spectator's point of view this is just awesome. God bless WLUG! (BTW, I'm with Theo... I just check my headers, dude! :) ) -Chuck
HI all, Nothing is perfect in this world, especially computers, no matter how much we all choose to deny it! :-) With that said, please use care when replying, and make sure that your favorite mailing tool sends your reply wherever you desire it to go, be it the list or the original sender. Have a sense of humor when somebody obviously makes the inevitable mistake. I think this is the best we can do until somebody invents the DWIM button on e-mail GUIs (do what I mean). :-) Later, Andy -- Andy Stewart Founder Worcester Linux Users' Group Worcester, MA, USA http://www.wlug.org
participants (7)
-
Aaron Haviland -
Andy Stewart -
ccb＠acm.org -
Chuck Homic -
Doug Chamberlin -
Josh Huber -
Viper