On Tuesday, March 12, 2002, at 03:54 PM, SnowDog wrote:

>>
>> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
>>
...

> The refutation is through inductive reasoning from empirical evidence. I
> subscribe to several mailing lists, and this one is the ONLY one which 
> does
> this because the others work MUCH BETTER. :)

...


Folks, this is way off-topic, and even if I'm wrong I am obviously a 
control-
freak jerk ;^} and therefore I'm going to insist on doing it my way for 
reasons
stated in the URL. The problem Craig mentions IS there, but it's a problem
in e-mail software, NOT in list-reply-to's, and its' being fixed by 
list-reply-to
munging is NOT a good thing* IMO, no matter how many others  do it, as
majoritarian arguments don't sway me much in this case.

There are plenty of other lists which do things differently, and this 
subject
is a subject of perpetual debate (flamewar) on my beloved NFAlist** (so I
have seen _ALL_ the arguments on both sides, believe me). Hopefully, the
e-gold list will somehow survive the evil Jim Ray. Thanks for 
understanding.
JMR

* especially for a "mature" list like the e-gold list, where it's a good 
thing to
limit traffic, in order to retain as many interesting people as 
possible. (A
"younger" list may have different considerations/needs.)

** which doesn't actually exist (if it did, I'd probably have to kill me!)


---
You are currently subscribed to e-gold-list as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Use e-gold's Secure Randomized Keyboard (SRK) when accessing your e-gold account(s) 
via the web and shopping cart interfaces to help thwart keystroke loggers and common 
viruses.

Reply via email to