ubuntu littered with malicious viruses, some oriented toward Linux

[Eric Dunbar]

> > Unfortunately using Evolution would (a) lock me into using Linux
> > exclusively (something that I won't do) and (b) lock me into using
> > Evolution.
> 
> a) Why? Imap for example is very accessable from other mailclients
> b) See A
> 
> I use evolution (normally), mutt (when I'm away from a good client),
> webmail (behind firewalls) and thunderbird (when I have to run
> windows).  Works great

Problem is that I'm no great fan of Evolution. It's an acceptable
Entourage analogue but neither Entourage nor Evolution are
satisfactory for mailing lists. GMail has opened up a whole new
paradigm of working with mailing lists that I just can't ignore for
such high volume lists as the Ubuntu ones (lower volume lists are OK
for "conventional" e-mailers like Evolution, Outlook Express, etc.).
Admittedly, it is limited by HTML and JavaScript, but what Google has
done with the interface is nothing less than stunning -- across a
variety of platforms and in even more browsers it simply works!

Just because _I_ use GMail and _I_ like GMail's mailing list
management features doesn't mean the lists should use 'reply-to' in a
certain manner.

> >>  >The LIST sent me this message.  If I reply to the message, it should go
> >>  >back to the list.  The author didn't send it to me, he sent it to the
> >>  >LIST.  The list sent it to me.
> >
> >>  I know this stirs strongly held opinions, but why would this be the wrong
> >>  way to do things?  Answer to be as brief and logical as the quote from
> >>  ROMeyn at the head of the email please...
> >>
> >The mail client should set policy, not the list.
> >If I want to reply to the list, i use the reply to list button.
> >If I want to reply to the user, i use the reply button.
> >Setting reply-to to the list breaks this.
> >-Thom

Of course, chances are you are in the minority on this one, so
(provided my assumption is right, and I suspect it is) you are
advocating things be the logical way for a minority (I receive
_sooooo_ many double posts which muck up GMail's filtering b/c it
thinks (rightly so) that the message is also a private communication &
thus shouldn't be archived & filtered).

Again, just b/c _I_ am on GMail and it doesn't work well with the
(logically expected list) behaviour, doesn't mean that reply-to should
be the way I suggest it ought to be.

> OK...so what I'm getting from this is that "Mailing Lists" are merely
> E-mail "reflectors" and when you subscribe you effectively set up a
> mirror pointing in your direction?  I've never really thought of them
> that way, but if I do, then your assertion makes sense.
> 
> But getting back to my "lowest common denominator" argument:  While
> this is an Ubuntu list, the logical assumption may be that everyone
> subscribed to the list is using Ubuntu/Evolution to do so.  I am not.

And neither am I, and judging by the headers of most people, neither are they.

> My main computer is a Mac PowerBook running OS X.  I'm a Eudora fan
> and user of many, MANY years and I'm not going to stop now.  Eudora
> doesn't have a "Reply to List" feature.  It's reply to the message or
> "Reply to all".  The latter is what I have to do and then manually
> strip out the original author so that I'm not one of "those people"
> who sends a message to both.

Or, as happens when I'm feeling lazy, everyone and their dog who was
cc-ed originally will also get it...

What is frustrating is that _some_ (not all IIRC) of the Ubuntu lists
are the only lists to which I am subscribed which have this behaviour
(it is very uncommon to have reply to author rather than list). Now, I
make sure I hit reply-all on all lists I'm subscribed too, just in
case I'm on the wrong one. There is one exception list and in that
case it makes perfect sense -- it's a (very high volume) swap list
meant for people to post items for sale which means replies should go
to the individual and not the list.

Eric.