On Sat, 2014-04-12 at 15:54 +0200, Tom Hendrikx wrote: > On 12-04-14 12:49, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Sat, 2014-04-12 at 12:30 +0200, Tom Hendrikx wrote: > >> > >> There are still a lot of users, on both technical and > >> non-technical lists, that use reply-to-all because the reply > >> button sends a message to the author in stead of the list. There > >> might be many reasons for them to do that (they're stupid, > >> ignorant, don't know their MUA, use a MUA that doesn't provide a > >> reply-to-list button, or something else I couldn't come up with > >> within 10 seconds), but it's still common practise, and it has > >> been annoying more experienced users. > > > > Reply-to-list is a different issue, discussed in detail at > > http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html with some "sample users" > > and pros and cons. > > > > It's probably even more off-topic for this particular list :) > > After reading your article, I see that may have misunderstood your > mention of 'a "Group Reply" button which will go back to the list' as > a description of reply-to-list, while you actually meant reply-to-all.
I was actually trying to void the 'reply to list' vs. 'reply to all' part altogether, so my 'group reply' covered both. In my case, literally so — the button labelled 'Group Reply' in the mailer I use can be configured to do either one. But that wasn't the point. Whether it includes other people or not, it *does* go back to the list. Not just the author. > You can't expect them to understand that using a different button in > their MUA for some situations (depending on circumstances that they > need to learn to recognize) is the right thing to do. Absolutely. I certainly *don't* expect them to learn such a thing. There's a private "reply" button for replying to the author(s) of the mail, identified in the From: address. It should *always* be private, and never get tricked into sending messages in public. And there's another "reply to all" or "group reply" button which makes a public reply. (Again, I'm setting aside the all vs. list bit.) It's that simple. It's exactly the same for MLM-managed mailing lists and for mails which just happen to have lots of people in Cc. Or it should be. Except that in order to make things "simpler", some people actually made it more complicated. > The 'inconvenience' that you so easily brush aside, is a lot harder to > overcome when you actually don't care about (technical) differences > between replying to a person vs. replying to a list. At some point, the user has to choose if they want to send an individual reply, or a reply to all the recipients of the original message. All MUAs give that choice, and ideally they would be able to do so consistently without their behaviour occasionally being "hacked" by abusive MLM software so that both options basically do the same thing. It's a bit disingenuous to describe that choice as a "technical difference", surely? Or was that not what you're saying? If someone genuinely doesn't know or care about the difference between replying privately, and replying in public, then either they are beyond help... or they can just take whatever behaviour they get and be happy :) -- dwmw2
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ dmarc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://www.dmarc.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc-discuss NOTE: Participating in this list means you agree to the DMARC Note Well terms (http://www.dmarc.org/note_well.html)
