On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 09:17:56AM -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
Does this mean that it is OK to CC people now, without a CC
being requested? Or do many people read the list via the web
interface to the mailing list archives without being subscribed
and will still get annoyed if they are CCed?
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 09:17:56AM -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
Does this mean that it is OK to CC people now, without a CC
being requested? Or do many people read the list via the web
interface to the mailing list archives without being subscribed
and will still get annoyed if they are CCed?
Paul E Condon wrote:
As a matter of fact, the current rule is helpful to me in assessing
the advice that I get. If I get a CC, I think this guy isn't a real
DD --- I wonder if he knows what he's talking about.
Well, the only problem with that thought is that if you take a quick
look at, say,
Historically, debian-user, and all of the Debian mailing lists,
have had a rule that you post and reply only to the list, and that
you do not CC anybody unless they explicitly request a CC. I have
been following that rule. However ...
Recently, someone posted something to the list and CCed me.
On Friday 19 March 2010 14:17:56 Stephen Powell wrote:
There have been a number of times that I have
not CCed people because they didn't explicitly ask for it,
That' s it. Continue!
Thierry
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe.
Stephen Powell skrev:
Does this mean that it is OK to CC people now, without a CC
being requested? Or do many people read the list via the web
interface to the mailing list archives without being subscribed
and will still get annoyed if they are CCed?
As a humble user, I do not know, but
On Fri,19.Mar.10, 09:17:56, Stephen Powell wrote:
Recently, someone posted something to the list and CCed me.
Since I am subscribed to the list, I get a private e-mail for
each posting to the list. If a poster also CCs me, I have been used
to getting two copies: one directly (via the CC)
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:17:56 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
(...)
Recently, someone posted something to the list and CCed me. Since I am
subscribed to the list, I get a private e-mail for each posting to the
list. If a poster also CCs me, I have been used to getting two copies:
one directly
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 10:16:40 -0400 (EDT), Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Fri,19.Mar.10, 09:17:56, Stephen Powell wrote:
Recently, someone posted something to the list and CCed me.
Since I am subscribed to the list, I get a private e-mail for
each posting to the list. If a poster also CCs me, I have
On 3/19/2010 8:17 AM, Stephen Powell wrote:
Historically, debian-user, and all of the Debian mailing lists,
have had a rule that you post and reply only to the list, and that
you do not CC anybody unless they explicitly request a CC. I have
been following that rule. However ...
Recently,
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 10:23:44 -0400 (EDT), Camaleón wrote:
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:17:56 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote:
Recently, someone posted something to the list and CCed me. Since I am
subscribed to the list, I get a private e-mail for each posting to the
list. If a poster also CCs me, I
On 20100319_091756, Stephen Powell wrote:
Historically, debian-user, and all of the Debian mailing lists,
have had a rule that you post and reply only to the list, and that
you do not CC anybody unless they explicitly request a CC. I have
been following that rule. However ...
Recently,
Paul E Condon wrote:
-snip-
I think a 'no CC' message in a signature block looks unfriendly, even
stupid. Like the legal notices about not reading wrongly delivered
email. I would not want to create an environment in which any help
giver felt an urgent need to do such.
As a matter of fact, the
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:16, Odd iod...@runbox.no wrote:
Paul E Condon wrote:
-snip-
I think a 'no CC' message in a signature block looks unfriendly, even
stupid. Like the legal notices about not reading wrongly delivered
email. I would not want to create an environment in which any help
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:16:33 -0400 (EDT), Odd wrote:
Could you please explain what 'DD' stands for? I seem to have
missed that one, sorry.
I didn't write it, of course, but I think in this context DD
means Debian Developer. Correct me if I'm wrong, Paul.
--
.''`. Stephen Powell
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 20:16:33 +0100
Odd iod...@runbox.no wrote:
...
Could you please explain what 'DD' stands for? I seem to have
missed that one, sorry.
Generally, Debian Developer.
Celejar
--
foffl.sourceforge.net - Feeds OFFLine, an offline RSS/Atom aggregator
mailmin.sourceforge.net -
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 10:54:33 -0400 (EDT), Mark Allums wrote:
On 3/19/2010 8:17 AM, Stephen Powell wrote:
That makes me wonder if the list server has been smartened up
No, probably more and more people have a mail UA that has reply-to-list,
like Thunderbird 3.
Or, your other message got
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mark Allums wrote:
probably more and more people have a mail UA that has reply-to-list,
like Thunderbird 3.
Lenny's default Thunderbird (that is, 2.0.0.22) doesn't though. I
believe it requires manually changing Cc: to To: in the list address
and
On 2010-03-19 16:37, Clive McBarton wrote:
Mark Allums wrote:
probably more and more people have a mail UA that has reply-to-list,
like Thunderbird 3.
Lenny's default Thunderbird (that is, 2.0.0.22) doesn't though. I
believe it requires manually changing Cc: to To: in the list address
and
19 matches
Mail list logo
