On 21 April 2010 14:56, Ashley Sheridan <ash@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 08:56 -0400, David McGlone wrote: > >> On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:42 +0200, Daniel Egeberg wrote: >> > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 14:27, David McGlone <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > I give up. trying to reply to messages on this list is tedious. I can't >> > > pinpoint whether it's because the list is set up to make replies go to >> > > the OP or the OP has his reply-to in his mail client set, or most people >> > > are hitting the reply-to button instead of simply reply. >> > >> > Then get a better email client if yours doesn't support "reply to all" >> > or "reply to group". It's hardly the mailing list's fault that your >> > client doesn't support that. >> >> My email client does support "reply to all", but it's IMHO >> inconsiderate. >> >> Think about people that have to pay for every Mb they download. "reply >> to all" causes these people to have to pay for duplicates. >> >> Now if somebody on this list was paying for their downloads, then you >> and I am costing them money by using "reply to all" and now there are 2 >> duplicate messages for them the download. >> >> How would you feel if this was you? >> >> -- >> Blessings, >> David M. >> >> > > > Did you read the link that David Robley sent on the original thread you > made? > http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > > What you're proposing would cause a lot of problems for the sake of a > few people. And I hardly think that a few emails are going to cause a > bandwidth issue for anybody. If bandwidth was such an issue, they'd be > using an email client that only downloaded the email headers first, and > from there you could easily discern the duplicate messages. Except it wouldn't cause a lot of problems, now would it? As you've heard from quite a few others, many mailing lists work using the 'reply-to' ... and have happy users. Most of the points in the doc you posted a link to are viewpoints from someone that's used to one thing and hates the idea of things changing - whether or not it makes life easier (the "It makes things break" for instance ... calling replying to the list instead of the OP a "break" is rather farfetched unless you've stared at something you hate for so long you've become blinded byt it. Then there's the "Freedom of choice": well, where's my freedom of choice? I can't use 'reply' as I want to, so it's effectively reduced *my* freedom). Quick guess is by now, the majority of people clicking "reply" *mean* to reply to the list but in effect reply to the OP. Using "reply-to" would help these people. Anyone using "reply-all" would see no difference. So when you're advocating that many subscribers should ditch their email client and install Evolution instead of having *one* email list have it's settings changed a bit ... I start to wonder if you've considered things from both sides. Regards Peter -- <hype> WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fake51 BeWelcome: Fake51 Couchsurfing: Fake51 </hype> -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
