Derek Martin wrote: > But this philosophy favors the casual list member over the people who > read the list regularly. The community should cater to its regular > members, not people whose interest and participation are fleeting... > So this approach is wrong. The Mutt community, by and large, chooses > Mutt because it is a superior tool for many mail processing needs; > they also tend to use other powerful tools to further improve and > streamline their mail processing needs. This question, and others > like it arise on the list from time to time, and on the whole the > community rejects the notion of "dumbing down" list policies (like > this one, or like setting reply-to to the list address) for the > benefit of those who are ignorant of, or can't be bothered to use > better tools. I've been here for nearly 15 years, and the arguments > have been pretty consistent for the entirety of that time.
+1! Insightfully written. > s. keeling wrote: > > I'm a sysadmin. My job is to make users' wishes happen, as long as > > they don't hurt others or the overall system. > > I was a sysadmin for a very long time, and I daresay I was a pretty > darn good one... I disagree that your job is to make users' wishes > happen. Your job is to help your users to best leverage the > technology you manage for them to achieve their goals. Sometimes, > part of that job is recognizing that what the user thinks he wants IS > WRONG, and pointing out that there are better alternatives. And > sometimes, your job IS to get in their way, when getting their way > hurts the greater user community. +1 again. I try to only very rarely post me-too types of posts. But I was compelled to say something positive about these very well thought out comments. It is as important to prevent us from moving backward as it is to try to keep moving us forward. Bob
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
