First my disclaimer.... I don't really care one way or the other how the Reply-to is set on the list. It's been set to reply to the person rather than the list for years (on the suse-linux-e list), and I'm kind of used to it... but... I do have some thoughts/observations on this. (and I'll probably need my flame retardant clothing, but... I don't care... some things need to be said here....)
[snip]
list manager should *not* add a reply-to pointing back to the list.
I can see the point that everyone raises: 1. There is a pseudo-standard (if you can even call it that) that considers changing the Reply-to to the mailing list as "harmful". 2. People long time subscribers) are used to the SUSE mailing list working this way. 3. _Some_ people are able to use mutt, pine or other text only, Linux/Unix based mail readers to read this list that can handle Reply-to sender and Reply-to list. 4. _Some_ people are using KMail/Evolution that can also handle the Reply-to list 5. A very small number know about the patch for Thunderbird that adds in the Reply-to functionality. OK, that's all fine and dandy, but... the reality is... this list's Reply-to behaviour is causing a lot of problems for people - especially the new Linux users who come here for help. If it wasn't causing problems... no one would be complaining. Can't anyone see that? Or are you all so stuck on this pseudo-standard that you cannot see that it's a problem? (it's only a standard if everyone complies with it... otherwise it's all just hot air... and only a minuscule minority complies with this "standard") 1. There are endless discussions about the Reply-to behaviour and why it's like it is. That's an indication there's a problem. 2. People feel obligated to add signature lines stating.. "Please reply only to the list," or something similar because they are getting the list reply plus the cc to them. This is an indication of a problem. 3. Look through the archives and try.. try to count the number of times someone has felt the need to start out their reply (on list) by saying "Please reply just to the list, I subscribe and get the list post and your cc" or something similar. This is an indication of a problem. 4. How many times have you (or I) offered help to a new user and got an off list reply that was actually intended to be on list? Again... there's a problem. 5. How many times (for those of us who cannot or do not use a list aware mail client) have you accidentally fired off a quick reply.. only to discover you've wither accidentally replied off list, or replied to both the list and the person because you forgot to remove the private address and paste in the SUSE address? I know I've done it countless times... even though I know how this list behaves (and understand why it's this way) . Again... a problem... (human generated, but still a problem). 6. Compare... how often do you feel it necessary to reply off-list to someone vs. replying to the list. I think I can count on one hand the number of times I've felt it necessary to reply off list in 8 years of being subscribed here. But.. the default behaviour is to reply privately... not to the list. Not everyone is ABLE to use mutt, pine, Thunderbird, Kmail, Evolution etc. I use GMail... not because I actually like GMail all that much, but because I can get to my SUSE list mail anywhere then. A lot of people use other OSes, and other mail clients to read this list. Whether they are webclients, Linux, Unix or Windows base is irrelevant... the point is.... they don't do mailing lists. Some of you may like to call that broken... whatever.. point is.. that's the way they work, and they are the more prevalent mail clients. Shouting and pointing fingers and yelling "Your client is broken" and "Get are real email client" isn't helping anyone... at all. Even within these "list aware" mailing clients you have to know that they are list aware... if you click reply-to in KMail in a mail from this list you get the sender.. not the list address. You have to know that you press L or you have to have edited your KMail button bar and manually added a Reply-to-list button. This behaviour is NOT the default... it is well hidden in the clients. Does anyone see a pattern here? There is a problem... it may be that the problem should be fixed at the mail client side... but... what do you think your success rate will be with "demanding" that commercial email clients change to conform to this standard? Basically... zero. Plus you have literally millions of people who are participating in mailing lists, and they are all used to the Reply-to list behaviour... then they stumble on this one... and it's backwards to anything they've seen before. Youcan say that people need to be educated on the correct way a list should be run... well good luck with that... you've got a big job ahead of you. Maybe the standard itself needs to be looked at. If someone sets out a standard for anything, be it mailing list behaviour, or the width of roofing shingles, and the consumer has issues with it or simply ignores it... do you change the consumer? or do you take a second look at your standard? There is a problem here, and there has to be a compromise one way or the other to solve it. Do you compromise and munge the Reply-to header to make things easier for new users and for people who are not using a mail reader that is list aware? Or do you leave it as it is and insist that everyone else is wrong and that they must change? I'm just trying to point out the realities of the situation here.... and I honestly think that the people insisting on the Reply-to to the poster thing should take a small step back and try to look at this issue a little more objectively... and less elitist. Like I said at the start... I don't care one way or the other how the Reply-to is set for this list. If it's set to the way it's always been on the suse-linux-e (which is different to every single other mailing list I'm on) then I'm OK with that. If the choice is made to set the Reply-to to go to the list (like every other mailing list I'm on) then I'm OK with that too. C. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
