On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 07:32:02AM +0200, Michael Monnerie wrote: > On Montag, 16. August 2010 Stan Hoeppner wrote: > > Why does "everyone" on this list "reply-to-all" when 99% of the time > > it is totally unnecessary, redundant, and potentially ruffles a > > sender's feathers, as in this case? > > I'm also on several lists, but the only list where reply-to-all is used > is this one - so I followed the way it's done here without having > questioned why. It's done by all Lists in the Linux development universe, and it's the only sane way to handle a list. We don't require people to subsribe to post to the list, and keeping everyone in the To/Cc list means it arrives at those people as well. In addition it allows subscribes that are on tons of lists to prioritize discussions they're actually involved in personally by getting a copy in the inbox that can be replied to ASAP while also having an archived copy in the list folder. Every other way to run a list is simply insane. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
