Re: [OT] cc: poster vs reply-only-to-list

2002-04-12 Thread Rocco Rutte
Hi, * Simon White [04/11/02 19:46:13 CEST] wrote: > 11-Apr-02 at 12:21, David Champion ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote : > I always hit L to reply to lists, and hope that Mutt will reply as > intended. This usually means a CC: to the person that posted as long as > they set up their headers that way.

Re: [OT] cc: poster vs reply-only-to-list

2002-04-12 Thread Volker Kuhlmann
There are also some reasons why not to cc: to person when replying to list. I prefer to receive msgs in list order. Generally, mailing lists do not have the highest priority in a work day, thus I read/reply when I have time (like now at 01:20 I should be in bed...). Duplicate removal removes the c

Re: [OT] cc: poster vs reply-only-to-list

2002-04-12 Thread Simon White
11-Apr-02 at 12:21, David Champion ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote : > begin 755 soapbox > I haven't noticed this list to be different from any other in this > regard, except that Sven is rabid about this topic and posts to this > list a lot. Yeah, agree there. Did Sven catch his rabid attitude from so

[OT] cc: poster vs reply-only-to-list

2002-04-11 Thread David Champion
* On 2002.04.11, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, * "Simon White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 11-Apr-02 at 12:55, Ian Chilton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote : > > > Sorry, no. Mailing lists are mailing lists. > > > Participation is expected, not > > > just one way communication. > > > > Actually, the cu