Hi, Friedrich Strohmaier wrote on 2011-10-26 00:59:
No, it definitely doesn't brake lists! Posters who choose one of those broken clients (regarding mailing list usage) will have to fiddle with reply-to all and mangling the posters address - their problem.
at least once a week, I even get mislead mails from one of our admins, who I think of being technically very experienced. The admin lists doesn't have reply-to mangling, and lots of content is missing on the list, because people always reply to me directly. Especially our admins have been bugging me to turn on reply-to-mangling on that list... weird world. :-)
I have seen users of mutt, Google Mail and a few other mail clients complaining.
I vote for all lists, because the above is valid for all of them. But well, I admit as long as we lead unexperienced users looking for support on a mailing list (which I consider not beeing a good solution), we should think about making that one an exception (and thus making life harder for those *giving* support).
My take would be to use one of the more prominent lists to try out the results - preferably users@, or in case we want to exclude that list, something like discuss@ could be a good starter.
In case pure chaos arises, we need to rethink the strategy, in case things work out well, we might adapt that for other lists.
What do you think? Florian -- Florian Effenberger <flo...@documentfoundation.org> Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to moderators+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/moderators/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
