> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> In your message dated Tue, 24 Aug 2004 10:29:08 -0500, Alex said...on behalf of Kenton White[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > FYI - when replying using a client like Outlook Express, do > > a "Reply All" or it doesn't go to the mailing list. ;)
That's excellent advice. However ALL of the other list servers I belong to change the Reply-To address to make this unnecessary. It's a shame this> list doesn't. Makes filtering harder too.
What is hard about this ?
There are split opiniopns about setting Reply-To: , see http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
Please try not to restart thet flame war here ;-)
That is useful advice, even to those who regard this list's reply management as second-best. However, in giving such advice, at a minimum don't stack the deck by noting "split opinions" while citing only one side of the split. So I complete your post by adding the other canonical citation:
http://www.metasystema.org/essays/reply-to-useful.mhtml
[FWIW, regardless one's position on the issue, one may observe that the former resorts to disparaging RFC-822 in order to make his case, while the latter is both more gracefully written and *supports* the RFCs -- a powerful meta-argument for the latter citation.]
A final observation: Like most lists, the largest mailing-list ensemble (Yahoo Groups) has always used Reply-To:<list> -- and those lists:
a) Rarely see any of the harmful effects cited by those who disparage
Reply-To:<list>, and
b) Never see the dreary and predictable frequency with which this
topic returns to _this_ list. (Indeed, I can't think of one such
list on which I have *ever* seen this topic.)
If facts be our guide ...
--
John
_______________________________________________
VNC-List mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To remove yourself from the list visit:
http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
