This Mailinglist - another vote for sanity

[Sean Miller]

rpowersau at gmail.com wrote:

>On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 15:01:38 +0000, Ewan Mac Mahon <ewan at macmahon.me.uk> wrote:
><snip>
>  
>
>>Equally, imagine a
>>non-subscriber posting; the current approach would allow people to use
>>'reply to all' so that both the poster and the list get responses;
>>reply-to mangling would force all replies to the list so they'd never
>>see any answers to their post.
>>    
>>
>
>How is this possible? I didn't think you could post to a list unless
>you were subscribed.
>  
>
It isn't -- we know that, but the advocates of "reply to sender" seem to 
be able to conjure up so many bizarre scenarios you should not be 
surprised at yet another strange one... people join mailing lists to 
send private messages to each other, and get upset if the list gets to 
hear how their problems were resolved... using the reply-to feature of 
mail specifications is some sort of violation of the integrity of the 
world... imho nothing written in defence of "reply-to-sender" would 
change my opinion that the current setup is wrong.

But, having seen most of the posters ask for a poll and none 
forthcoming, I do not think we will ever get anywhere. The pedants will 
win, we will all change the way we work to accommodate them... what a 
great advert for community it really is... 3 or 4 people impose their 
views on the masses yet again.

And I thought Open Source was about enablement and empowerment! What a 
fool I am... take the aforementioned minority who continually put down 
anybody who asks for a change... don't they remind you of Bill Gates and 
his like?

Sean