Re: Reply to Considered Harmful [Re: [Gimp-developer] Gimp server startup [OT]]

2005-06-01 Thread Michael Schumacher
> Von: Alan Horkan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> On Tue, 31 May 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> > On Tuesday, May 31, 2005, 17:24:01, Michael Schumacher wrote:
> >
> > > This is intentional - google for "reply to considered harmful".
> >
> > This might have been of concern years ago, before people were used to
> > mailing lists which do set the Reply-to header. Nowadays, I'd say that
> the
> > opposite is true, since setting the Reply-to header seems common
> practice
> > (at least if I look at the mailing lists I'm following, there are only 2
> > that don't set the header).
> 
> The problem is still the same.
> 
> It is better to accidentally mail only one person and need to resend to
> the list than it is to accidentally send mail to many people.

Well, let's just say that I tend to ignore private mail that is sent to me
from a mailing list participant if it still has the subject used on the
list, especially if it still contains the list markers ([gimp-user] etc).
Sometimes, this is just accidently - I get the mail, rush through it, don't
have an answer readily available and since it still has the marker, I assume
it went to the list and someone else might answer it.

Sometimes, a question pops up what makes me think "why couldn't the sender
have posted this to the list or have searched the archives?". Especially
when I don't have much time, I knowingly ignore these messages.

Or, in just one sentence:

When posting to a mailing list, I expect replies (either to or from the
list) to end up on the list.


The following is IMO:

Not munging the reply-to header should be considered harmful. Not doing it
makes it harder than needed for many people - usually the people who would
be able to help the person who posted the question - to reply to as many
people as possible. And making this harder is is not the purpose of a
mailing list, is it?


Michael

-- 
Weitersagen: GMX DSL-Flatrates mit Tempo-Garantie!
Ab 4,99 Euro/Monat: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer


Reply to Considered Harmful [Re: [Gimp-developer] Gimp server startup [OT]]

2005-06-01 Thread Alan Horkan

On Tue, 31 May 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 18:48:58 +0200
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
> Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] Gimp server startup [OT]
>
> On Tuesday, May 31, 2005, 17:24:01, Michael Schumacher wrote:
>
> > This is intentional - google for "reply to considered harmful".
>
> This might have been of concern years ago, before people were used to
> mailing lists which do set the Reply-to header. Nowadays, I'd say that the
> opposite is true, since setting the Reply-to header seems common practice
> (at least if I look at the mailing lists I'm following, there are only 2
> that don't set the header).

The problem is still the same.

It is better to accidentally mail only one person and need to resend to
the list than it is to accidentally send mail to many people.

- Alan

___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer