Daniel Eisenbud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Did you _read_ the beginning of my post that you quoted above? I give
> another really good reason or two for at least mutt-dev to be open.
Because it's listed in the "mutt -v" output, right? Sounds reasonable
to me, but I usually assume that people who post on a list are actually
subscribed to the list; I always use list-reply when writing back. If
the user isn't subscribed, they won't see my reply, and I'll have no
idea that they didn't see it.
Maybe I should start using group-reply at all times, but that gives the
old dupe-message problem, solved only if the remote users uses Mutt (or
some sort of de-duping agent; most don't).
Well, whatever. I'll keep list-replying for now.
--
David DeSimone | "The doctrine of human equality reposes on this:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | that there is no man really clever who has not
Hewlett-Packard | found that he is stupid." -- Gilbert K. Chesterson
Convex Division | PGP: 5B 47 34 9F 3B 9A B0 0D AB A6 15 F1 BB BE 8C 44
