Thomas Fernandez wrote: > Whether I used "Reply" or "Reply to author" is up to me, regardless of > whether I use an email client that uses "r" and "g", or I use TB. The > article makes no sense.
Although I don't fully agree with the article, it does make sense. You are incorrect in assuming that using Reply or Reply to All is up to you (or "Reply to author"/"Reply" as you listed). E-mail clients have this choice, and the Bat can even ignore Reply to addresses, though only at the account-level Reply template (Do not use FROM name for REPLY-TO addresses). Is there a way you could reply privately to me without some method of copying and pasting or deleting an address? There is always going to be an extra step. In other words, there is no *direct* method to reply to the list sender only. If I sent you a message privately (not through a list) and copied my friend Bob and Alice on that message, you could either Reply (to me only) or Reply All (to me, Bob and Alice). In this case, either reply function follows the logic of most e-mail clients: reply to the person sending the message or reply to everyone who received the message. Now... all that being said.... :) My ratio of private replies to group replies is such that this really hasn't ever bothered me. In fact, I have created folder templates to make replies go to the group instead. And a private reply is often just a matter of using Reply All (which gets both from and Reply to) and deleting the group address. That's how it works here at least. But this is where I tend to side with some of the principles of that article. What's happening is that the *normal* behavior of Reply and Reply All (fairly standard across e-mail clients) is being changed. And it seems like this is happening to make it easier on list members who likely want to send replies to the group most of the time. Enough lists do this (munge Reply To) that now it's almost the norm - I've belonged to a great many lists over the years and the majority send replies to the group. It's a bit surprising, then, that a group such as TBUDL, which is so stringent about standards that could arguably be not-so-standard (cut marks, bottom posting, etc.) would go along with reply-to munging. -- Ken Green Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 ________________________________________________ Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
