Igor de Oliveira Couto wrote:
> On 16/06/2012, at 1:48 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>
>> If the message got here, by definition it's not a "wrong" address.
>>
>> Apparently both addresses wind up here so both are correct.
>
> I believe the old address is kept because of users that have to
> /choose to continue to use it, as pointed out previously. That
> doesn't mean that it's 'correct', or even that it's as 'correct'
> as the new one.
Neither you nor I define the behavior of this list. The list owner is
RunRev Ltd., and if they've decided to allow both addresses as fully
functional it's not my place to decide they're wrong.
I can do what I want with my own lists, but in someone else's home I
must respect their rules.
If nothing else, consider this democratically:
Either multiple people must make a modest change, or one person must
make a modest change.
If RunRev's decision to allow the older address to be fully functional
for this list was a problem for more people than were using the older
address, it might be fair to suggest those using the older address make
the change.
But since apparently only one person is adversely affected by RunRev's
decision, the fairest thing to do seems obvious.
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World
LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/FourthWorldSys
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
