On Wed, 2004-06-02 at 23:08, Uri Guttman wrote: > > BR> This is not a good idea. See > BR> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html for a thorough essay on > BR> why this is bad. > > and there are arguments on why it is good. just another religious war > with no correct side as each ways has good and bad points.
There are valid arguments for both positions, so the best approach is to pick one and stick with it. I'd argue that it's far more harmful to change the behavior back and forth, as I've seen proposed on other lists whenever the topic came up. Often someone suggests "voting" on it, but if you do that every time, you'd keep changing back and forth in a Florida deadlock, and members wouldn't know from one post to the next how the list was going to behave. -- John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0xD5C7B5D9 PGP-Key-Fingerprint 72 FB 39 4F 3C 3B D6 5B E0 C8 5A 6E F1 2C BE 99
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Boston-pm mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
