Adam Kuehn wrote:
Scott Glasgow wrote:
If I hit Reply All, it does go to the list, but sends a separate
copy to the sender (which can be annoying to the recipient, I would
imagine). I checked again in my other lists, and Reply does indeed
send to the list, not the sender. Is this something in the way OE is
configured (if so, why just this list?), or the way the list is
configured, or have I just happened to reply to senders who have
their Reply To set, or what?
This page was written for you:
<http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=CssDiscussListHeaders>. In
addition, if you go to the CSS website and choose the options page
<http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d/>, you can sign in
and edit some list parameters. Just choose the Edit Options button,
after entering your address and password. One of the options on the
next page (fifth down on the right side) is "Avoid duplicate copies
of messages?" Set this to "Yes" if you are one of those people who
would be annoyed by getting both a list copy and a personal copy of a
Reply To All message.
Now all should be right with the world.
Presented as a public service,
I do not have a problem with this decision by the list moderators. I do,
however, wonder why this was not included in what seems to be the list
guidelines (the "very definite ground rules") or any other of the
information which I assiduously read whule subscribing. I am not a newbie to
the Web, nor to online communications, having watched lines of text being
spelled out letter by letter at 300 baud back in 1983 on a
character-mode-only 9" inch amber monochrome screen. The Web did not exist
then, nor did the Internet in the sense that we use the term today. Sysops
were gods, Telix was the whip (well, not quite yet, back then), and knowing
your AT commands and how to set up your modem separated the men from the
wannabes.
Please do not patronize me. A simple reply (using Reply and not Reply All)
would have sufficed. I don't need "all should be right with the world" (not
accurate in any event because it depends upon concrete action by every
individual member to avoid duplicate messages) or "public service" ( if it's
so public, why not put it in the information presented to all subscribers
during the process of subscription?).
I value this list, a great deal. The information available here is both
unique and inestimably valuable, and I do not wish to be administratively
unsubscribed. I have endeavored in this response to adhere to the guidelines
given in the above-mentioned reference. My hope is that the administrators
will understand that those of us who subscribe to multiple lists, all of
which use the "Reply To munging" described in your links, are somewhat
nonplussed when this list behaves differently than the way to which we have
become accustomed. Since it is clearly your wish that this is the way it
should be, I ask only that you provide this information to subscribers of
the list in a manner which does not result in an after the fact
admonishment of the list users.
I remain,
Your most humble servant,
Scott Glasgow
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
