2 Feb
2000
2 Feb
'00
1 p.m.
I'm not saying any of this to say how it should be
set up. That's not my
call. I'm just saying what I've typically seen on other lists. If Derek
wants it changed to the old method, he can do it or he can call me to do it.
I personally prefer the new way, but my vote doesn't count! :)
Jay West
I personally vote for the old way! I'm on quite a few different ML's and
only the DECnet/Linux one does it this way. It's more of a pain to have to
get the correct TO: with it set this way that the old way! Especially if
I'm using 'elm', like right now, since I either have to forward it to the
ML, or remember to chage the TO: after I'm done typing the message.
Zane
2 Feb
2 Feb
1:54 p.m.
I vote for the new way. It's now trivial to
reply either to the sender alone, the sender
and the list, or the list alone.
With a decent mailer each of these options is
now one click.
Vastly superior.
Dave
healyzh(a)aracnet.com wrote:
I'm not saying any of this to say how it
should be set up. That's not my
call. I'm just saying what I've typically seen on other lists. If Derek
wants it changed to the old method, he can do it or he can call me to do it.
I personally prefer the new way, but my vote doesn't count! :)
Jay West
I personally vote for the old way! I'm on quite a few different ML's and
only the DECnet/Linux one does it this way. It's more of a pain to have to
get the correct TO: with it set this way that the old way! Especially if
I'm using 'elm', like right now, since I either have to forward it to the
ML, or remember to chage the TO: after I'm done typing the message.
Zane 
3 Feb
3 Feb
1:59 a.m.
My mailer doesn't "click"...
On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, David C. Jenner wrote:
I vote for the new way. It's now trivial to
reply either to the sender alone, the sender
and the list, or the list alone.
With a decent mailer each of these options is
now one click.
Vastly superior.
Dave
healyzh(a)aracnet.com wrote:
I'm not saying any of this to say how it
should be set up. That's not my
call. I'm just saying what I've typically seen on other lists. If Derek
wants it changed to the old method, he can do it or he can call me to do it.
I personally prefer the new way, but my vote doesn't count! :)
Jay West
I personally vote for the old way! I'm on quite a few different ML's and
only the DECnet/Linux one does it this way. It's more of a pain to have to
get the correct TO: with it set this way that the old way! Especially if
I'm using 'elm', like right now, since I either have to forward it to the
ML, or remember to chage the TO: after I'm done typing the message.
Zane 
2:42 a.m.
New subject: regarding the reply address on the list....
I prefer the old way, this new way is playing havoc with the filter
functions on my mailer since the headers are never the same.
99% of the time I want to reply to the whole list and now it's more
work to do that.
On 3 Feb 00, at 7:59, Aaron Christopher Finney wrote:
My mailer doesn't "click"...
On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, David C. Jenner wrote:
-----
David Williams - Computer Packrat
dlw(a)trailingedge.com
http://www.trailingedge.com
I vote for the new way. It's now trivial to
reply either to the sender alone, the sender
and the list, or the list alone.
With a decent mailer each of these options is
now one click.
Vastly superior.
Dave
healyzh(a)aracnet.com wrote:
I'm not saying any of this to say how it
should be set up. That's not my
call. I'm just saying what I've typically seen on other lists. If Derek
wants it changed to the old method, he can do it or he can call me to do it.
I personally prefer the new way, but my vote doesn't count! :)
Jay West
I personally vote for the old way! I'm on quite a few different ML's and
only the DECnet/Linux one does it this way. It's more of a pain to have to
get the correct TO: with it set this way that the old way! Especially if
I'm using 'elm', like right now, since I either have to forward it to the
ML, or remember to chage the TO: after I'm done typing the message.
Zane 
4:24 a.m.
New subject: regarding the reply address on the list....
"David Williams" <dlw(a)trailingedge.com> wrote:
I prefer the old way, this new way is playing havoc
with the filter
functions on my mailer since the headers are never the same.
99% of the time I want to reply to the whole list and now it's more
work to do that.
Strange! My filters (on the "Sender:" header) are working great. The
header seems to always be
Sender: owner-classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
If you filter won't work on "Sender:", it looks like there's always
a "classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org" in either the "To:" or "CC:"
headers; my
software can filter on those as well, but I suppose YMMV.
2 Feb
2 Feb
11:39 p.m.
At 07:00 PM 2/2/00 -0800, healyzh(a)aracnet.com wrote:
Zane and group,
The URL posted by Philip (liste(a)artware.qc.ca) just previous to this msg (
FYI: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html and titled '
''Reply-To'' Munging Considered Harmful' ) is clear on making it easy
for
you since you use Elm 2.5. Just hit "r" or "g" depending upon whether
you
intend the msg to be private or to the group. Many of us have been bit by
sending an intended private reply to the whole list for example a monitary
offer negotiating for something offered for sale, a flame stating 'Yer
mamma wears army boots!', etc. This present classiccmp reply setting is
Good IMHO.
That munging article is a very good discussion on the subject even though
the author has a rather strong opinion against the automatic "Reply all"
list setting. I nevertheless follows my feeling on the matter.
I use Eudora and had just hit the "Reply All" button to publicly reply to
this msg as I do with several other lists I'm on.
Regards, Chris
-- --
Christian Fandt, Electronic/Electrical Historian
Jamestown, NY USA cfandt(a)netsync.net
Member of Antique Wireless Association
URL: http://www.antiquewireless.org/
I'm not
saying any of this to say how it should be set up. That's not my
call. I'm just saying what I've typically seen on other lists. If Derek
wants it changed to the old method, he can do it or he can call me to do it.
I personally prefer the new way, but my vote doesn't count! :)
Jay West
I personally vote for the old way! I'm on quite a few different ML's and
only the DECnet/Linux one does it this way. It's more of a pain to have to
get the correct TO: with it set this way that the old way! Especially if
I'm using 'elm', like right now, since I either have to forward it to the
ML, or remember to chage the TO: after I'm done typing the message. 
3 Feb
3 Feb
12:59 a.m.
On Thu, Feb 03, 2000 at 08:39:36AM -0500, Christian Fandt (cfandt(a)netsync.net) wrote:
[someone else wrote:]
>I personally vote for the old way! I'm on
quite a few different ML's and
>only the DECnet/Linux one does it this way. It's more of a pain to have to
>get the correct TO: with it set this way that the old way!
The "correct" headers are the ones which the sender of the message put
on his message.
The URL posted by Philip (liste(a)artware.qc.ca) just
previous to this msg (
FYI: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html and titled '
''Reply-To'' Munging Considered Harmful' ) is clear on making it easy
for
you since you use Elm 2.5. Just hit "r" or "g" depending upon whether
you
intend the msg to be private or to the group.
For those that have noticed a bit of a flaw in their mail program
regarding this issue, I'll take a moment to point out that the MUA
That Sucks Less, 'mutt', offers not only reply and group-reply but
also list-reply. :-)
-Rich
--
------------------------------ Rich Lafferty ---------------------------
Sysadmin/Programmer, Instructional and Information Technology Services
Concordia University, Montreal, QC (514) 848-7625
------------------------- rich(a)alcor.concordia.ca ----------------------
3:46 a.m.
On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Christian Fandt wrote:
I use Eudora and had just hit the "Reply
All" button to publicly reply to
this msg as I do with several other lists I'm on.
But Christian, your message went out twice: once to the list and once agan
to poor Zane.
Now my reply message is going out THRICE: once to the list, once again to
poor Zane, and yet another time to poor you.
Pretty soon, if people don't pay attention, 50 copies of the same message
will go out rather than just the one that should go to the list. The
intent of a mailing list is to be able to send one message to one address
and have it disperse from there. This new reply-to mechanism defeats that
purpose.
Anyway, I wouldn't really care if I could figure out how to set the list
back to postpone mode so I don't have to be getting any of these messages.
Sellam International Man of Intrigue and Danger
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for a six in a pile of nines...
VCF East? VCF Europe!? YOU BETCHA!!
Stay tuned for more information
or contact me to find out how you can participate
http://www.vintage.org
9089
days inactive
9090
days old
8 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
af-list＠wfi-inc.com -
cfandt＠netsync.net -
dastar＠siconic.com -
djenner＠halcyon.com -
dlw＠trailingedge.com -
eric＠brouhaha.com -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
mtapley＠swri.edu -
rich＠alcor.concordia.ca