[antlr-interest] OT: Mailing List Configuration
Gavin Lambert
antlr at mirality.co.nz
Fri Feb 22 21:26:56 PST 2008
At 07:11 23/02/2008, Darien Hager wrote:
>Thirded. Myself, whenever I make a cross-user discussion list I
>ensure the option is set.
Uh-huh. And you can't even seem to quote properly. So that's a
good recommendation. :P
Seriously people, can we just drop this? This has come up several
times before and it always has the same result.
With things as they are now, you have a choice. You can hit the
Reply button to reply just to the sender, or the Reply All button
to reply to the group. There is no need to edit any of the
addressing in the latter case, since the mail server is smart
enough to not send out a second copy to an address that's already
in the envelope. (Well, you can tell it to send you an extra copy
if you really want. But why?) If your client filters are set up
correctly, any such response will still go to the same folder as
any other list discussion as well. So there is no downside.
If the Reply-To header is forced, however, suddenly you've just
made it harder for the people who *do* want to send private
replies. While I suppose you could argue that private replies are
bad and that people should be "encouraged" to post publicly, the
simple fact is that it's easy enough to change a private reply
into a public one but impossible to go the other way. And I've
seen numerous examples of just such mistakes on lists that do
force Reply-To.
More information about the antlr-interest
mailing list