Can we not fix the emails that come from this list to have the reply to set so all we have to do is hit reply?
Thom Hehl wrote:
Can we not fix the emails that come from this list to have the reply to set so all we have to do is hit reply?
That's a bad practice. <http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html>. -zefram
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 12:51, Thom Hehl <Thom@pointsix.com> wrote:
Can we not fix the emails that come from this list to have the reply to set so all we have to do is hit reply?
This topic gets debated to death. The reason why most list admins do this can be seen in the following pages. http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/listreplyto.html http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html Enjoy, Kevin -- Kevin Lyda Dublin, Ireland US Citizen overseas? We can vote. Register now: http://www.votefromabroad.org/
On 08/12/11 13:04, Kevin Lyda wrote:
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 12:51, Thom Hehl <Thom@pointsix.com> wrote:
Can we not fix the emails that come from this list to have the reply to set so all we have to do is hit reply?
Thunderbird has a button labelled 'reply list' which, I believe, uses the List-Post header although it may actually do something slightly more clever. Either way, I know exactly who I'm replying to when I hit the button and I can always choose if I want to do something different. This is another way of saying "use a different mail reader" although I suspect you're stuck with Outlook and can't do anything about it.
This topic gets debated to death. The reason why most list admins do this can be seen in the following pages.
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/listreplyto.html http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html
It's odd that the people who get really hot under the collar about this are the ones that want the reply-to removed :-) In spite of the arguments going back a decade, mailman still leaves it as an option because some list owners want the replies to go to the list, usually because it makes list searching easier. There may be other reasons, for example, writers to the list are incapable of correctly choosing or simply that it has always been done that way. There are often very good reasons why you shouldn't have a reply-to header as well: the best examples of these are the very busy mailing lists where having your name in the header means "you really should pay attention to this message". I take the view that it's the list owner's choice. If the list owner wants to change the way it's done then that's his or her choice and while other's might have a view, it's the list owner that gets to decide. I definitely do not think that you can say, definitively, that one choice or the other is good, bad or ugly. Rather than the world and his got leap up and down getting all enthusiastic, we should leave it to the list owner to decide. jch
participants (4)
-
John Haxby -
Kevin Lyda -
Thom Hehl -
Zefram