[linux-dvb] Re: OT: List behaviour

["dwe" <dwe@firemail.de>]

I think that's mostly nonsense blabla. It's nearly arrogant.

If I REALLY want to reply only to the author, I still can look up his adress
in the "FROM:" header.

In most cases I do want to reply to the list.
But I do very often click accidently on "Reply" instead of "reply to all"
(and other do so, too), I'm sure I am not the only one. And if one clicks on
"Reply to all" he has to (or at least should) remove the senders adress. It
all causes only confusion and this is the first mailing list I subscribed
that shows this behaviour.

My point of view is:

1.) In absolutely the most cases you want to reply to the list

2.) If one wants to reply private, he can still do. Just copy the Adress
from the FROM: header

3.) The current handling does nothing than cause confusion by many
accidently "mislead" mails, I see NO advantage

4.) The IMHO VERY rare "Can't Find My Way Back Home"-cases (see below) ->
bad luck

----------
Some short excerpt from that page:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
It Makes Things Break
If you use a reasonable mailer, Reply-To munging does not provide any new
functionality. It, in fact, decreases functionality. Reply-To munging
destroys the "reply-to-author" capability. Munging makes this command act
effectively the same as the "reply-to-group" function. We haven't added
anything new, we've only taken away. Reply-To munging is not merely benign,
it is harmful. It renders a useful mail capability inoperative.

Freedom of Choice
Some administrators justify Reply-To munging by saying, "All responses
should go directly to the list anyway." This is arrogant. You should allow
me to decide exactly how I wish to respond to a message. If I feel a public
response is justified, I'll hit the "g" key and tell Elm to do a
group-reply. If I believe a private response is more appropriate, I'll use
"r" to send one. Please allow me the freedom to decide how to handle a
message.

Can't Find My Way Back Home
It may be impossible to reply to the author of a message once the Reply-To
header is munged. The Reply-To header was not invented on a whim. It is
there for the sender of a mail message to use. If you stomp on this header,
you can lose important information.
There are good reasons why the sender might insert a Reply-To header. The
sender might not be the original author of the message (the name that
appears in the From header). If responses should return to the sender and
not the original author, then the sender will insert a Reply-To header. Or,
maybe the sender added a Reply-To because he or she cannot receive email at
the account from which the message was sent. There are many good reasons to
place a Reply-To header into a mailing list message.
If the Reply-To is munged by the mailing list, the value provided by the
original sender is lost. Reply-To munging can make it impossible to reach
the sender of a message.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tomi Ollila" <Tomi.Ollila@iki.fi>
Cc: <linux-dvb@linuxtv.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2003 8:14 PM
Subject: [linux-dvb] Re: OT: List behaviour


>
> I'm for the the current system, where reply-to is not munged to the
> mailing list address. More information about the reasons:
>
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
>
> I don't care if I get replies to my mailing list posts twice. I usually



-- 
Info:
To unsubscribe send a mail to listar@linuxtv.org with "unsubscribe linux-dvb" as subject.