Barbara Duprey wrote:
<snip that (a) discussed a way of pointing the Unsubscribed Poster
("UP") at the thread (in the Archive) that includes his/her message and
(b) described a way that the UP can retrieve the messages in that thread
using an ezmlm command>
Hmm. But someone still has to do this. And presumably it's not necessary
if the respondent remembers/bothers to include the UP's address in the
To: or cc: list of the response.
So a UP sends a question. One of us sends a response. What I've been
doing that has caused so much heat is to have a look at the conversation
and if it meets some weird combination of criteria I'll decide to
"forward to unsubscribed poster". So now, if the responder hasn't
included Barbara Duprey's instructions, I have to send those instead?
Publicly, to the UP *and* the list, or privately, to the UP only? If
publicly, why not just "forward to to unsubscribed poster"? If
privately, why not just forward the response *privately* to the UP? In
either case, the forwarding message could include a suitable boilerplate
clarifying what is happening and that the forwarder is not some special
representative of OOo but just another volunteer trying to make sure the
UP sees the response?
A simple forward with boilerplate seems much easier than having to fish
out the "thread number" and include it in a message to the UP who in any
case may not understand or be able to act on the instructions.
Or?
--
Harold Fuchs
London, England
Please reply *only* to [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
