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.
I've heard two arguments in favor of "reply to list". The first one is that some people believe that all the discussion really SHOULD go to everybody, and basically don't believe in the need for private replies. There may be lists where this is actually the correct position, but I don't think this list is one of them.
The other argument I have heard in favor is that some people get annoyed at the fact that when people use "reply to all recipients" in most email clients, they get two copies of the message (one private, and one from the list). On a list managed by Mailman, such as this one, such users can easily fix that problem by setting their user options on the server. What you're looking for is "Avoid duplicate copies of messages", which is at the bottom of the user options page; if Mailman sees that your address is in the "To:" or "CC:" field of the message, it won't send you a copy.
If Mailman came out of the box with this as the default, we'd probably hear a lot less clamor for Reply-To munging. Hint to Mailman administrators: you can set the default for new users on the General Options page.
_______________________________________________
Boston-pm mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
