[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: [school-discuss] Reply-to considered harmful (was Re: Job advert)
On Wed, Apr 13, 2005 at 04:02:27PM -0600, cdmiller wrote:
> Most of the earliest lists I was on always set the reply-to to the list
> address, I believe to foster discussion on list for the benefit of the
Ditto. So, personally, I'm a "Reply-to munging" advocate for 99% of the
lists I'd participate in. There are some lists that don't munge, and for
those I alias the [R] key in Mutt to act as a list reply (normally the
[L] key in Mutt), for the folders that those lists drop into (via procmail).
I found this easier on myself than trying to break a 10-year habit of hitting
[R] to reply to a list post. Admittely, switching to using the [L] key
specifically would be more sensible, but try to explain that to my fingers. :)
(The [G]roup reply key is right out.)
> These days I, (and probably all of us), deal with lists operating in
> both fashions, but I prefer the simple reply-to list myself, because I
> am lazy. One will always encounter folks on both sides of this fence.
What I don't understand, and I have to pin down Marc Merlin the next time
I see him at an SVLUG meeting (since it appears he was working on this)
is why something like Mailman still doesn't appear to have a per-user
setting for this !?!?!?!
The munge/don't-munge wars continue to rage on to this day, but it could
be as easily controlled (by the end users) as the "not metoo" and "digest"
So consider this not an argument for or against (just an anecdote about my
own experiences), but more a question: why isn't this configurable on
a per-user basis!? :^)