On 16 Oct 2003 at 17:08, Paul Smith wrote: > At 16:44 16/10/2003, you wrote: > >I prefer the 'reply to sender' default rather than > >'reply to all'. ...
> It really depends what you see the purpose of the list being. > > If replies only go back to the original message sender, then there are > quite a few disadvantages: The problem with this is that it presumes [by your use of 'only'] that the list membership is either entirely [or primarily] made of folk who cannot manage to do anything fancier/cleverer with their email clients than hit "reply". now, if you had said that "..._some_ replies will go back ...unintentionally..." that'd be closer to the fact, I think... And look at the other side of the coin -- if you send a reply privately that you intended to send publicly, that is an easy oversight to correct [in a large variety of ways], and generally little/no harm done (either to the parties involved or to the forum). The converse is not true: if you send a reply publicly that you really intended to keep private that's an unfixable faux pas. I also note that for most mail clients, it is easiier to make a *choice* [for those of us who do make such choices] if the list is reply-to-sender. For most [but not all!] mail clients, it is VERY much harder [near impossible for some if you don't type in the address brute-force by hand into the reply!] to address a private reply if the list is set up reply-to-list. /Bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <-- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
