BLU discuss - List config changes

[Mike Bilow]

Derek Atkins wrote in a message to Mike Bilow:

 DA> No, the only people that get double-responses are the people
 DA> who are actually in the To: and CC: fields.  For example,
 DA> Jonathan and John will both receive double responses, but no
 DA> one else will.. (And I'll probably receive double-responses
 DA> to this message, although my mailer will hide them from me
 DA> ;)

I am actually reading this list via real UUCP -- I know, I know -- and I cannot
even tell from what I see whether the message was posted to the list or to me
as an individual.  I can often guess correctly, but your message says:

 DA> From: Derek Atkins <warlord at mit.edu>
 DA> To:   Jonathan Arnold <jdarnold at buddydog.org>

So by the time I get it, I have no assurance of whether this message was posted
to a list, nor to which list it may have been posted.  If I want to reply to
the list, I have to manually type out "discuss at blu.org" as an override in the
reply address, which is what I have done in this case.

 DA> When the reply-to field exists, most mailers wont put the
 DA> sender's address in the response.  THis means that if I want
 DA> to respond privately I have to manually cut-and-paste the
 DA> sender out of the original message and into my reply header,
 DA> and then remove the list. Now, I get both the list (because
 DA> it was in the To or CC field) and the sender, and I only
 DA> need to cut out the list to send a private message.

This may be, but my situation is the opposite.  I can always cut and paste the
sender's personal address if I want to reply privately, but I have no idea
where to reply (except by guessing) if I want to reply to the list.

 DA> I think it is safe to assume that most people on the BLU
 DA> list are intelligent enough to cut out the list address when
 DA> they want to send a personal reply to a message.  At least
 DA> _I_ would like to think that people on this list are that
 DA> intelligent.

I admit that my situation is suboptimal.  Indeed, my entire mail system could
be the poster child for suboptimal.  Nevertheless, it has been running this way
for over a decade, back when UUCP operators were not regarded as escapees from
a leper colony.  There is effectively no such thing in UUCP as what SMTP calls
the "envelope" address, so I strongly support retaing the list post address as
the "Reply-To" in relayed messages.
 
-- Mike


***
Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with
"subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" on the first line of the
message body to discuss-request at blu.org (Subject line is ignored).