mail to individuals

[Douglas Pollard]

Odd wrote:
> 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.
>
>   
When I reply to a post on Sounder the header says that Sounder is the 
sender and it's from the poster on the list.   As far as I can tell  
since I click on a post  on the list that post was sent by an individual 
and he is the sender to sounder.  Sounder in turn sends it to me in the 
form of a list of posts, there for my reply should posted on this Sender 
list of postings.  Why would I post to an individual.  Sounder is 
screwed up and no amount of disagreement or arguing can change that in 
my mind. I hope someone else changes their mind because it is going to 
be dog'on hard to change mine.   All of this is about posting  to who 
and where. WE as individuals are not receiving or sending e-mails we are 
posting to a list.                                                     
             Doug