On Fri, Jul 19, 2013, Mark Roberts wrote: > Aahz Maruch wrote: >>On Fri, Jul 19, 2013, Mark Roberts wrote: >>> >>> Every email list I've ever been on has had reply-to-list as the >>> default. Why would you participate in a mailing list and not want >>> replies sent to the... list? Makes no sense. >> >>Interesting -- even before the various lists I've been started changing >>their policies around a decade ago, I'd say that at least half the lists >>I've been on were not reply-to list. As for why, aside from the issue >>about boo-boos with intended private messages, it's a way to control list >>volume. Another reason is that some mailing lists have restricted access >>and anyone not on the list participating in the conversation needs to be >>cc'd, and the Reply-To header mucks with that. > > I can see how one might accidentally slip and send a private message > to the list - been there, done that - but if I compare the ratio of > private emails to public (entire list) emails I've sent in reply to > PDML messages it's well over 100:1.
That's almost certainly true for me for all mailing lists I've been on. But the point is that the cost of sending a private e-mail public is also much higher, and I've seen a lot of mildly embarrassing, some moderately embarrasing, and a few outright damaging (e.g. disclosing major secrets). I don't think it's 100:1 in that direction, but I also don't think it's a slam dunk that the cost/benefit analysis is totally oriented toward reply-to list on this one ground. (I do realize, of course, that reply-to sender doesn't completely prevent stupid disclosure of private/secret info, one only needs to look at damnyouautocorrect.com to prove otherwise.) -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
