[Glastonbury] bits

[Damon Chaplin]

On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 22:04, Sean Miller wrote:
> Martin Wheeler wrote:
> 
> > <religious rant>
> > That's because there *was* a majority opinion of list-folk at one time 
> > who insisted that the "sensible" [note the prophylaxis of the 
> > lift-out] way to set up the list was to remove the default 'Reply to 
> > Poster' and make it the highly dangerous and objectionable 'Reply to 
> > List' instead.
> >
> > I *told* you all it would end in tears.
> >
> List e-mail replies should go to the list....
> 
> ...this is the way that 99% of lists work, how people expect them to 
> work and it is only people like you, Martin, who would expect anything 
> else (!)
> 
> And, *please*, Steve, think about what you are suggesting before saying 
> "as moderator, Martin, you can change what you want"... this man is 
> mad... we know this, yes?!?! ;-)
> 
> *tongue firmly in cheek*
> 
> But, seriously, "reply to list" is better than "reply to sender".... 
> otherwise there is no point in having it as a list... the idea is that 
> person 'A' says "I am having a problem", person 'B' says "I have it too" 
> and then persoin 'C' provides the solution and the whole list gets to 
> see it....
> 
> In Martin's config person 'B' would reply to person 'A' and nobody else 
> would benefit! That is not "community"... is it?

mailman strongly recommends the same as Martin, by the way.
And 99% of the lists I use agree with Martin as well (mainly mailman
lists, as it happens).

Email clients should have "Reply to All" buttons to reply to the list,
and the standard "Reply" should reply to the person. That way you get a
choice.

So in this case I think Martin is actually correct!
(He was wrong about the HTML stuff a while back though!)

Damon