Hi Richard, You are quite right. I did not address Alan's argument, the reason being that his points did not resonate with me.
> - You reply to a message on the list. Assuming that you are > replying to > the sender, you include information that is personal, privileged, or > inappropriate-for-public-consumption. Your reply goes to the entire > list. The damage is done. Maybe. But it's highly unlikely that I would be replying to a message from a mailing list dedicated to a software product for technical authoring and publishing with anything that's personal, privileged, or inappropriate for public consumption. > - You reply to a message on the list. It goes to the sender. With two > mouse clicks, you correct the oversight and direct your reply to > the list. What normally happens to me with Framers is that I reply to a message with some info that I believe will of interest to other Framers and may trigger a response, or I add a new sub question. Then, after several days I remember the thread and wonder why no one has responded. I check the message I sent and discover that once again I've been fooled by Framers non-standard reply mechanism. Paul On 16 May 2008, at 15:11, Combs, Richard wrote: > Paul Findon wrote: > >> On 15 May 2008, at 04:25, Jeremy H. Griffith wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 22:05:47 -0400, Alan Houser >>> <arh at groupwellesley.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Which is worse? -- >>>> >>>> - You reply to a message on the list. Assuming that you are >>>> replying to >>>> the sender, you include information that is personal, privileged, > or >>>> inappropriate-for-public-consumption. Your reply goes to the entire >>>> list. The damage is done. >>>> >>>> - You reply to a message on the list. It goes to the sender. With > two >>>> mouse clicks, you correct the oversight and direct your reply to >>>> the list. >>>> >>>> A default "reply-to-all" listserv configuration is evil. >>> >>> Quite right. But it's worse than that. A list with reply-to-all >> >> I disagree. >> >> Hedley is not asking for a "reply-to-all." What he, I and, no doubt, >> others want is "reply-to-list." In other words, when you click your >> Reply button, by default, messages are addressed to the list. > > You're making a distinction without a difference. Alan and Jeremy > weren't speaking _literally_ about "reply-to-all," but _functionally_. > Your "reply-to-list" goes to everyone on the list, so it functions > exactly as Alan described. > > You haven't countered Alan's argument, just stated that you prefer > something different. OK, noted. :-) > > Richard > > > Richard G. Combs > Senior Technical Writer > Polycom, Inc. > richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom > 303-223-5111 > ------ > rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom > 303-777-0436 > ------ > > > > > >
