11-Apr-02 at 12:21, David Champion ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote :
> begin 755 soapbox
> I haven't noticed this list to be different from any other in this
> regard, except that Sven is rabid about this topic and posts to this
> list a lot.
Yeah, agree there. Did Sven catch his rabid attitude from some rabid mutt?
;-)
> The sweeping convention over all I've ever seen is to reply to the list
> and to the poster. If the poster doesn't like that, the poster can
> use duplicate ID processing, or MFT headers, or whatever to evade the
> duplicates -- but in any case, it's not divine manifest never to cc:
> the poster.
In other lists I subscribe to, I would say this is generally the case.
> Moreover, I'm not sure how custom on a particular list means that you
> shouldn't cc: a person who asked to be cc:ed. If this were a different
> list, you would cc: him upon request?
I always hit L to reply to lists, and hope that Mutt will reply as
intended. This usually means a CC: to the person that posted as long as
they set up their headers that way. The inherent advantage of a CC: is
that the poster usually gets replies back quicker if directly CCd to him,
since mailing list servers (certainly of big lists) usually have a
delivery lag of a few minutes. At least from where I'm sitting.
> The reasons for wanting to be copied are several (or many), and are not
> limited to "I'm not on the list" -- which would, IMO, be sufficient
> reason to comply anyway.
I don't like non list members just hopping in and hoping to be replied
back to directly, because this is not far from people replying back to ME
rather than the list if they have any questions. This is what I most
object to, and this is why I would prefer they were ON the list in the
first place.
> I don't particularly want to harp on it any more than usual, but I had
> to take exception to the idea that this list is different from others.
#!/bin/sh
if (all_lists_are_unique) # this is the same as saying if 1=1, no?
then
this list is different from others
fi
---- or ----
#!/bin/sh
lists=`ls ~/Mail/Lists`
for list in $lists
do
if (netiquette:mutt-users ne netiquette:$list) then
The list $list has different "rules" than mutt-users ;-)
fi
done
Enough timewasting with scripts that won't ever execute anyway.
Anyways I agree that there is a general overriding netiquette which is not
the same as any pet peeves of mutt-users "personalities"...
Simon.
--
[Simon White. vim/mutt. [EMAIL PROTECTED] GIMPS:67.13% see www.mersenne.org]
Recognizing disagreements in belief requires having enough agreements in
belief to translate or understand the words and deeds of my opponent.
-- Anthony O'Hear (combining, somewhat, several modern philosophers).
