Friday, January 21, 2000, 11:55:25 AM, Marck wrote:
SL>> Other lists are different?
> What, all lists are the same?
Asside from announce-only lists where there are no replies can you think
of a list where replies aren't made to individuals? :)
> Not from my POV, however. My name is "Marck D. Pearlstone". When this
> message comes back out of the list, it will request that replies be sent to
> TBUDL rather than [EMAIL PROTECTED] That may not be my *usual*
> address, but it certainly is the address at and from which I am engaging in
> this conversation. I am perfectly happy about this, because I am accustomed
> to the conventions of this list and other lists of which I am a subscriber.
However, you are not the list nor is the list's address yours. The
reply-to of the list satisfies the convention of replies going back to the
list unless otherwise needed. We don't need your name associated with the
list address to have that.
> It gives a far greater human feel to it for me.
Group hug! No really, makes you an easier target for me. *gack*
It just pisses me off.
> different "Reply-To" address in their original message then IMHO it is a
> politeness and courtesy to combine the two headers in exactly the way TB
> does it.
Uhm, no, it is not. Why?
1: It is header munging. Don't do it.
2: If the person wants their name in the TO: field off a reply-to, they
can configured the reply-to to have their name in it.
3: Personally, I don't give a crap if my name is in the to field or not.
In fact, on some lists I send mail out as "Grey d'Miyu
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>" and get replies to "Grey". Big deal. What matters is
the *BODY* of the message. And in the body of the message, low and behold, we
have an attribution line with the person's name in it!
"Friday, January 21, 2000, 11:55:25 AM, Marck wrote:"
> In the case of TBUDL, we have the list configured to direct replies
> back to the list. This is where the real bone of contention arises.
No. My bone is with TB! doing something it should not be doing, period.
If I set my reply-to to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't want people sending
mail to "Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>". Why? What happens when it is
a communal box with several different people responding? IE, I may not be the
only person in that box, why should my name be attached to that address unless
I asked it to be?
It should not.
> It would be ridiculous to leave my friend's name off that envelope just
> because it is not going to their normal address.
That is not the issue here. Your friend's name is part of the technical
routing of that letter. Who it is do is defined by his name, especially if
that holding address is, say, his parent's place. Which of the 5 people at
that residence at that time will be getting the letter?
That technical requirement doesn't exist in email. I am
[EMAIL PROTECTED] That is all that is needed to route mail to me. The
name in front is a comment, nothing more. However, having a comment
mismatched with an email address causes confusion, may be what people don't
want, and is SEVERELY frowned upon.
> I feel exactly the same about e-mail and nothing you can say will convince
> me that you're right here Steve.
You're wrong. See above. When you can prove that there is technical
merit equal to the addressing on snailmail I might consider your arguments as
mildly valid. Until then, no, wrong, don't do it.
> I agree, that it's soggy technology but, heck it's human. I can understand
> how it works and how it will work and stop it if it's about to do something
> embarrassing.
That is you. You're familiar with TB! and how it works. Now have that
interaction with the millions of nonTB! email readers and their reaction to
it.
> I read via the ticker virtual folder. The thread is in my base folder.
> I can't see it. :-(
Tough.
> Why should I want to expend the energy to set that up when it already works
> *exactly* how I want it to. I have more than enough to do. Truly.
Because how you've gotten used to doing it is *WRONG* for quite a few
technical and social reasons.
> Matter of opinion. I think that politeness in list based conversation is a
> plenty good enough reason. (However, I believe that you don't think that a
> *good enough* reason).
No, it is not a good reason. "Politeness" is not a reason to break
standards. Breaking standards, by its very nature, is impolite. How can you
argue to be impolite for politeness' sake?
> I have hand massaged your name into something that now correctly represents
> the fact that the e-mail address in the To: field of the message is not
> yours. Does that make you feel any less aggrieved? No, probably not :-(.
> Well, I tried, all right? <g>
No, it doesn't. My name is still associated with an address that does not
get mail to me and only me. Stop it, NOW.
> ... which is why I have made the habit of only recording From addresses with
> the automated add facility :-).
That is you. Now think globally and you'll understand the problem,
especially where you interact with people who aren't using TB! which includes
this list.
> It stopped confusing me after one mistake (which I deleted immediately
> without using and went hunting for a message *from* that individual). This
> isn't exactly difficult stuff, you know.
Sure it is. You are aware that it is also included in the quick fill
portion as well? I've sent mail to lists because of this *BUG* in the program
of combining a person's name with an address that is not theirs.
> I have presented a few. Top of my list are politeness, clarity and flow. I
> take it you don't consider these legitimate. If so, that's a shame.
Correct. Because to do so it breaks standards and conventions. It is
impolite to do so, it is unclear what is happening, it is rude.
> Since they're all options - one of which I like and one of which I don't -
> what's the problem?
Interaction with the world as a whole.
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
