mail to individuals

[Odd]

Samuel Thurston, III wrote:
> Hi Odd, you seem to be confused.
> 
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Odd <iodine at runbox.no> wrote:
>> Samuel Thurston, III wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Stephen <stephen_o at rogers.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I believe it is a problem with the mail settings on the sounder list all
>>>> though they deny it.
>>> If you read the body of reference work on the subject, it is actually
>>> the *other* lists that have a problem with the settings.
>> Not really. The overwhelming majority of lists have chosen
>> the sane option. Your "body of reference" means absolutely
>> nothing in the face of logic.
> 
> Overwhelming majority... where are you collecting these statistics?

I am on at least 100 mailing list. The Ubuntu lists are the only
ones insisting on this practise. Also, since so many mail clients
lack such a function, it can only be because the authors know
it's not needed.

> The "sane option" as you call it is usually chosen on lists heavily
> trafficked by people who don't use proper RFC-compliant email clients,
> to reduce confusion and cut down on the number of threads dedicated to

Wrong again. They choose to do so because it makes the most sense.

> "why is the list configured wrong" when in fact the proper question is
> "why is my email client broken, and why do i continue to use it even
> though it is".

The email client isn't broken. It simply lacks a function that wouldn't
be needed if lists are set up in a way that makes the most sense.

> The use of the "reply to list" option and the
> avoidance of crappy non-compliant clients are both recommended on the
> ubuntu maling list etiquette guidlines:
> 
> http://www.ubuntu.com/support/community/mailinglists/etiquette
> 
> "When replying to messages, use your email client's Reply To List
> function, rather than "Reply" or "Reply To All". This is Ctrl + L in
> Evolution (Ubuntu's default email client), and Shift + L in Kmail
> (Kubuntu's default email client) and in mutt (a popular console email
> client). If your email client does not have this function, ask for it
> to be added! "

It's far, far easier to set up the mailing list the right way.

>>> Reply should reply to sender.
>> No. That defeats the whole purpose of a mailing list.
> 
> IF clients have the "reply to list" button or option, as they should
> to conform to the RFC's, it does absolutely no such thing.

Not all RFCs are standards. Btw, could you point me to the RFC
concerning this topic?

>>> Your client should have a reply to list option. If it doesn't your
>>> beef is with the email client, not the list manager who is conforming
>>> to standards.
>> Windows is the standard in desktop operating systems. So we
>> should all use it, according to your thinking.
> 
> This is the most perverse possible twisting of my words.  By your
> reasoning, the list should throw out all RFC compatibility and send
> outlook-formatted RTF emails, because most people use a mail client
> that supports it (outlook express).

No, that's _your_ reasoning, don't you see? You're the one saying
we should follow all standards.

> I agree the situation sucks.  I repeat: direct your complaint to the
> vendor of your  non-RFC compliant email client.

I have a reply to list button, thank you very much. Even so, I
disagree with this practise anyway, so you wouldn't find me
complaining to any mail client vendor.

> Lets try to get more
> things working the right way instead of breaking more things to
> accommodate other broken things... like they do in the windows world.

This is a small matter. I don't even see why there's a RFC about it,
when common sense is all you need to see what's the right way to
do it.

-- 
Odd