On 11 Mar 2011, at 06:00:00, Bart Silverstrim wrote: > > On Mar 10, 2011, at 10:51 PM, objectwerks inc wrote: > >> It could easily be argued that the listserve becomes the author when it >> sends out the mail. It is not just a forwarding service, but is taking >> original content, perhaps changing formatting, stripping out attachments, >> making a digest, etc and then making a new post. It may pass itself as the >> new sender or may pass the original sender as the sender, but in the context >> of the RFC you quoted, the list software could easily be the "author" of the >> message. The RFC you quoted is not speaking of posts to mail lists, >> frankly. That is out of the realm of what it is trying to say. > > The part that's funny to me is that it seems everyone is resorting to trying > to quote and interpret RFC's and headers and whatnot to determine who is > "right" in this situation. > > If anyone actually gave a damn about practical use cases, they would approach > it as if they were assessing a usability issue with a program. > > If I didn't know or give a damn about how or why email does or doesn't work, > if I just wanted it to work, here's what I'd know. I hit reply, and my > message doesn't go to the people I want it to go to. If I hit reply-all, it > does go to a bunch of people, including the one "list" I wanted it to go to. > For some reason, reply-all also sends multiple copies to some people. > > To an end user who doesn't give a damn, that tells me it's broken. Fix it. > > That, in simple terms without resorting to an internet competition to find > out who's ego is the least bruised, sums it up from a usability standpoint. > This is a mailing list. It shouldn't be an exercise in puzzle-solving skills > just to send a @#$% SMTP message to a group of tech-heads. > > It's quite obvious that no matter how much yellow water is sprayed in this > argument the listserve people in charge don't give a rat's @#% whether the > list works easily or not. And it's their prerogative if they want to turn > this into some exercise in additional frustration in order to use it. It's > not a democracy, and quite frankly it's obvious they don't care, so all the > arguing is for nothing. You might as well stop trying to participate in the > community here if it's a PITA and either start another listserve or go to > another community like in the StackExchange and see if that works better for > your workflow. It's pretty obvious nothing here will change.
The people who run the list not only don't care if it's a problem to reply to it, they don't care about policing the list to remove dead connections. Every time I send mail to the list I get a bounce message from TeacnNet re someone who apparently had an account there but doesn't anymore… and who was a list member. Just repeat after me, 'the list owners don't give a damn...' _______________________________________________ MacOSX-admin mailing list [email protected] http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-admin
