On 2010-10-22 11:38 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote:
OK, then I'm back to my initial position -- since informative responses
can easily come deeper in the thread, this technique (even if it were
supported by the list manager capabilities) would lead to such responses
failing to reach the OP without
On 10/22/2010 11:25 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2010-10-22 11:38 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote:
OK, then I'm back to my initial position -- since informative responses
can easily come deeper in the thread, this technique (even if it were
supported by the list manager capabilities) would lead to
Le 2010-10-21 01:26, Florian Effenberger a écrit :
Hi,
Charles Marcus wrote on 2010-10-20 14.18:
(including lists) for the long run...
Anyway, at a minimum, I would dearly love to see simple list specific
pages for subscribing/unsubscribing. Mailman generates these out of the
box, so its not
On 2010-10-20 8:55 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:
In that regard, the modification of the Reply-To is, I think, more
likely to give a false sense of security than to fix the problem of
people not getting responses they would benefit from.
I totally disagree.
The only time this wouldn't work is if
On 10/21/2010 9:52 AM, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2010-10-20 8:55 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:
In that regard, the modification of the Reply-To is, I think, more
likely to give a false sense of security than to fix the problem of
people not getting responses they would benefit from.
I totally
On 10/21/2010 12:02 AM, Drew Jensen wrote:
If we had a similar page for OOo, it would make an
enormous difference there, as well.
Why not - http://oucv.org/oooext.html
I did not setup that nabble archive, and can't change settings - if you
back up there to the openoffice level you are
On 10/20/2010 11:50 PM, Drew Jensen wrote:
On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 19:55 -0500, Barbara Duprey wrote:
Howdy Barbara
I don't have anything against forums (though I hope we can avoid having two
top-level ones, as for
OOo, and careful planning is needed in determining the subforums). The main
On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 17:09 -0500, Barbara Duprey wrote:
On 10/20/2010 11:50 PM, Drew Jensen wrote:
Every web forum I know of send notification email to the original poster
whenever a response is posted to a thread they created.
Well now, that's *very* interesting! I clearly haven't used
Barbara Duprey b...@onr.com wrote in message
news:4cc0ba20.70...@onr.com...
On 10/20/2010 11:50 PM, Drew Jensen wrote:
snip
Every web forum I know of send notification email to the original poster
whenever a response is posted to a thread they created.
Well now, that's *very*
On 10/21/2010 6:28 PM, Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
Many forums, and wiki pages, allow you to tick a box to watch them,
even if you didn't originate them, and then you'll get a notification of
each response. I agree, though, that it's a nuisance to not have the
response itself show up in one's
On 10/21/2010 5:18 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:
I'd just like to make sure I'm clear on this, OK? If I get a message
with a Reply-To header, and respond to it using Reply, not only does the
response go to those in the Reply-To header,
Yes it goes to everyone in the Reply-To header...
but that
Hi,
Charles Marcus wrote on 2010-10-19 22.37:
Correct, hence my suggestion to simply tweak the list server software to
add a custom Reply-To header (both list*and* unsubbed OP) for posts
from unsubbed posters.
I have another idea...
Instead of individual list subscriptions, why not create a
On 2010-10-20 6:09 AM, Florian Effenberger wrote:
Charles Marcus wrote on 2010-10-19 22.37:
Correct, hence my suggestion to simply tweak the list server software to
add a custom Reply-To header (both list*and* unsubbed OP) for posts
from unsubbed posters.
I have another idea...
Instead of
On 10/19/2010 1:16 AM, James Wilde wrote:
On Oct 19, 2010, at 00:27 , Barbara Duprey wrote:
Does this mean you're a (the?) moderator for this list? Not having that
Delivered-To header definitely does complicate things! I'm amazed that anybody
is posting here unsubscribed at this point, I'd
On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 19:55 -0500, Barbara Duprey wrote:
Howdy Barbara
I don't have anything against forums (though I hope we can avoid having two
top-level ones, as for
OOo, and careful planning is needed in determining the subforums). The main
difference, which is a
positive for
If we had a similar page for OOo, it would make an
enormous difference there, as well.
Why not - http://oucv.org/oooext.html
I did not setup that nabble archive, and can't change settings - if you
back up there to the openoffice level you are actually looking at a flat
view of the
Hi,
Charles Marcus wrote on 2010-10-20 14.18:
(including lists) for the long run...
Anyway, at a minimum, I would dearly love to see simple list specific
pages for subscribing/unsubscribing. Mailman generates these out of the
box, so its not like this should be a lot of work - unless mlmmj
On 2010-10-18 6:27 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:
Even if the Reply=To were modified, wouldn't the inclusion of the OP on
the messages fall apart as soon as somebody didn't use Reply All?
The purpose of Reply-To header is to manage how replies are handled.
Reply All is not necessary if the Reply-To
On 2010-10-19 9:00 AM, James Wilde wrote:
On Oct 19, 2010, at 13:50 , Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2010-10-18 6:27 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:
Even if the Reply=To were modified, wouldn't the inclusion of the
OP on the messages fall apart as soon as somebody didn't use
Reply All?
The purpose
Hi all,
Bernhard Dippold wrote (19-10-10 00:23)
Hi Barbara, all,
[...]
It's hard to read all the mails and to reply to the most important only
(in my eyes).
I will probably not be able to contribute much to this thread (or to the
wiki) during the next few weeks - but I promise to stay on
On 10/19/2010 06:00 AM, James Wilde wrote:
On Oct 19, 2010, at 13:50 , Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2010-10-18 6:27 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:
Even if the Reply=To were modified, wouldn't the inclusion of the OP on
the messages fall apart as soon as somebody didn't use Reply All?
The purpose of
Hi,
Jon Hamkins wrote on 2010-10-19 18.43:
Unless the reply should be addressed to someone other than the sender,
the Reply-To shouldn't be set. Mailing list servers often add a
Reply-To header, so that discussion is directed to the list.
the reply-to header is set on purpose. When replying
On 2010/10/19 7:00 AM James Wilde wrote:
At the moment I'm using Mac Mail, which pulls the sender's name if I press
Reply, and everybody's name if I press Reply All. As far as I remember Outlook
has the same characteristics. I can't remember what T-Bird did on Linux and I
haven't used
On 10/19/2010 09:51 AM, Florian Effenberger wrote:
Jon Hamkins wrote on 2010-10-19 18.43:
Unless the reply should be addressed to someone other than the sender,
the Reply-To shouldn't be set. Mailing list servers often add a
Reply-To header, so that discussion is directed to the list.
the
On Oct 16, 2010, at 00:50 , Barbara Duprey wrote:
...
It is often not clear whether or not the OP is subscribed -- many can't/won't
look at the full headers or filter on them, and sometimes they join the
discussion later, when the header is not available. For somebody who really
has an
On Oct 17, 2010, at 19:54 , Charles Marcus wrote:
...
I do know that the users/discuss lists volume is way too heavy for an
'average user' to get any benefit from. For example, since checking my
email last on Friday evening, there have been 150+ new messages to this
list... this would
On 10/18/2010 1:24 AM, James Wilde wrote:
On Oct 17, 2010, at 19:54 , Charles Marcus wrote:
...
I do know that the users/discuss lists volume is way too heavy for an
'average user' to get any benefit from. For example, since checking my
email last on Friday evening, there have been 150+ new
Hi Barbara, all,
Barbara Duprey schrieb:
On 10/15/2010 7:11 PM, Bernhard Dippold wrote:
[...]
I'd like to establish a common agreement on how to deal with moderated
mails, so these off-topic mails will be not necessary any more.
That would be nice, and maybe we can make it work -- but this
On 10/18/2010 1:16 AM, James Wilde wrote:
On Oct 16, 2010, at 00:50 , Barbara Duprey wrote:
...
It is often not clear whether or not the OP is subscribed -- many can't/won't look at the
full headers or filter on them, and sometimes they join the discussion later, when the
header is not
On 2010-10-16 5:00 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:
No, because so often they get overwhelmed by the list volume.
Mailman has the concept of 'umbrella' lists...
Maybe we could create 'micro' lists - say, one for Writer, one for Calc,
one for Impress, etc - then make the 'discuss' and 'users' lists
On 10/15/2010 7:11 PM, Bernhard Dippold wrote:
Hi Barbara,
Barbara Duprey schrieb:
[...]
[Bernhard, I'm not sure you actually saw my post == it's all snipped
here. But I think it's pertinent to some of your points.]
I did - but as I only replied to the main point (in my eyes), I removed
I agree with what Barbara Duprey wrote in response to Bernhard, in a
long note that I'm not quoting here. We really need some way of
supporting ordinary users, especially the vast majority who just want
their questions answered and/or who don't have the time or interest to
join our community.
Hi Barbara,
Barbara Duprey schrieb:
[...]
[Bernhard, I'm not sure you actually saw my post == it's all snipped
here. But I think it's pertinent to some of your points.]
I did - but as I only replied to the main point (in my eyes), I removed
the other parts to increase readability.
You
33 matches
Mail list logo
