Bill Freeman wrote:
>
> Ken Coar writes:
> > All it will mean to me is that after about the second reply that
> > I post that goes only to the sender, I won't reply to *any* GNHLUG
> > list messages any more. I get multi-MB of mail every single
> > blessed day, and there's far too much of it to which I *can't*
> > 'reply-to-all' for me to change my finger pattern.
>
> Now *that's* a broken MUA. A "reply-to-all" command (which
> even BSD mail has: the "r" command) should include as recipients all
> of the "To:" addresseses from the original message, which, for list
> mail, always includes [EMAIL PROTECTED], and even all of the "Cc:"
> addresses.
What aspect do you consider broken? I don't think you understood
my point -- it's having to do one-or-the-other instead of the
same-for-all that's the problem for me, which isn't a technology
issue.
I won't deny that Netscrape is a pretty poor MUA, but with
roughly 1GB of mail tied up in its folder structure, on disk
and CD, switching to something else wouldn't be simple. Or
so I think. I always have Windows available, but not Linux,
alas.
--
#ken P-)}
Ken Coar <http://Golux.Com/coar/>
Apache Software Foundation <http://www.apache.org/>
"Apache Server for Dummies" <http://Apache-Server.Com/>
Come to the first official Apache Software Foundation
Conference! <http://ApacheCon.Com/>
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
