On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 22:28:45 +0000, Neil Bothwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:58:07 -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: > > > Although I've just sent a similar email, I want to jump in here with a > > "me too". Andrea, there are some users out here that realise you were > > doing the right thing and we applaud you for it. It's unfortunate that > > this list-at-large doesn't seem to want to fix things that are broken. > > Whether Reply-To munging is right or wrong, and this argument is likely to > be resolved soon after the Vi vs. Emacs debate, changing the way the list > works without letting people know only caused confusion and bad feeling. > > A simple post to the list informing subscribers that Reply-To had been > removed, preferably with a link to the page explaining the reasons, would > have avoided such an outcome. >
Yes, amen brother. Exactly what I said in an earlier post. Advanced warning is the polite approach, and it avoids lots of furor. -- Collins -- [email protected] mailing list
