Reply-To issues proposed for Community Council agenda [Was: This Mailinglist]

[Ewan Mac Mahon]

On Sat, Jan 15, 2005 at 03:55:54PM +0000, Sean Miller wrote:
> Jeff Waugh wrote:
> >Please read our code of conduct on the website. We have it so that we
> >can avoid this kind of behaviour or unproductive discussion in our
> >community.  Of course, another simple rule is, "if you don't have
> >anything nice to say, don't say anything at all". That works pretty
> >well in Ubuntu, too. :-)
> >
> If a percentage of posts to the Ubuntu Users list are getting lost, 
> because of a setting that is not intuitive -- ie. you subscribe to 30 
> discussion lists, and the Ubuntu one has reply-to-sender
The ubuntu list is not 'reply to sender', it simply doesn't specify
either way. The three possible states are to set 'reply to list', 'reply
to sender', or the current 'you decide as appropriate'. That goes for
the user sending as well as the user replying; if you wish you can set
the reply-to header, as you see fit in each individual case, yourself.

> and the rest the norm 
This may not be the norm for /your/ lists, but it is for technical ones
like this (which, for what little it's worth, make up the majority of my
lists), and for the reasons I explained above.  If you'd like to go
through those reasons and explain why you think they don't apply here
I'd like to hear it. It possible that you've got something, or it's
possible that you're basing it on misunderstandings. For example:

Sean Miller wrote:
>rpowersau at gmail.com wrote:
>>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

When of course, it is; at least to this list. This is what people mean
when they refer to an 'open' list as oposed to a 'closed' one. I posted
a whole load of situations where reply-to mangling would be bad, and
that mostly rely on the list being open. You could have believed me, you
could have doubted me but looked into it, but instead you chose to
assume that I was making it up. You also seem to be under the impression
that non-subscriber posting is 'bizarre'; this may be your experience,
but that just means that your experience is limited to the other sort of
list setup.

<snip>
> I would argue that this is not "misconduct" as you suggest, but rather
> trying to improve the current situation.
> 
> I am simply asking for a change in settings, and clearly people agree 
> with me.. I do not understand why you would even start talking about the 
> "code of conduct".. I do not believe that anything I've written would 
> violate any code of conduct -- I have made no personal insults, 
You accused me of making up a "bizarre scenario" to justify my views,
and then compared me and everyone else who's tried to explain the
reasons why things are the way they are to "Bill Gates and his like".
You might not think that's an insult, but I do.

Finally while open source may indeed be about "enablement and
empowerment" using it is also about learning, and about community.
Ignoring explanations and reasoned arguements in favour of making 
wild erroneous allegations doesn't help you with either.

Ewan
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-users/attachments/20050115/1bd9c42e/attachment.sig>