[antlr-interest] a request about "reply-all" to list

[Maurice van der Pot]

On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 11:46:40AM -0700, Loring Craymer wrote:
> I find that very irritating myself, but consider that a design flaw that
> should be fixed at the source--the mail list handler--and not by those of us
> using the system.  This has been a source of recurring discussions on the
> mailing list, with IIRC Mitchell arguing for the current mode as "proper
> etiquette".

If Mitchell or whoever already was arguing for this, he probably would
have mentioned http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html. Just in
case he didn't, please read it.

> I see this as one of those cases where "civil disobedience" is
> appropriate--you should fix the problem, not us.  In fact, the dual messages
> may be a plus until that happens--it keeps the aggravation level high enough
> that the problem might get fixed!

Maybe you should be blaming your mail client instead. The client I'm
using allows me to define lists I am subscribed to and has 3 options for
replying: reply (to author only, which should be the reply-to), list
reply (to the list address that I defined) and group reply (to all
recipients).

And while we're talking about things that irritate, I find top-posting
and quoting entire messages without using them as context to be quite 
annoying as well.

Regards,
Maurice.

-- 
Maurice van der Pot

Gentoo Linux Developer   griffon26 at gentoo.org     http://www.gentoo.org
Creator of BiteMe!       griffon26 at kfk4ever.com   http://www.kfk4ever.com

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.antlr.org/pipermail/antlr-interest/attachments/20050531/11ed33ca/attachment.bin