[SWLUG] Reply-To on lists

[Julian Hall]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dave Cridland wrote:
> Indeed - my email client generally ignores Reply-To for lists, and
> offers to set a default method of reply (list, sender, or both) to
> the user, which seems much more sensible.
>
> Dave.
Please note I have *no desire* to start a flame-war, so anyone who
disagrees with the below, please mail me off-list.  I'm in the middle
of University exams and have neither the time nor inclination to be
fighting online.  Constructive discussion yes of course, bickering no.

Sorry guys, I don't agree with *any* of that website at all.  FYI I'm
using Thunderbird 1.5, a couple of weeks old.  The assertion that 'any
modern capable client should be able to reply to group or individual'
is patently wrong, and is phrased *in my personal opinion* a touch
arrogantly.  It is basically saying 'if you don't use a mail client I
approve of then you're a bad person'.  In Thunderbird I click Reply
and on all other lists I'm on the reply defaults to the list.  If, for
example, I click Reply All to this message, then Justin and Dave get
two copies each as well as the list.  I've noticed quite a lot in
mails replying to this list that more than one copy goes out.  It's
especially noticeable obviously if the reply is to me, as I get two
copies.

IMHO those who complain about alleged munging should think about the
bandwidth being wasted by multiple copies of the same email flying around.

As for the heading "Coddling the Brain-Dead, Penalizing [must be an
American] the Conscientious".  That is a) downright insulting and b)
incredibly pretentious.

Kind regards,

Julian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEbbADjs/5IBdCO1ERAiZiAJ9ZonljxfChSuHn5SWOB9iMKLkkrQCfUdem
f2VPFjF/GcL1wx6raYtAqiM=
=psB4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----