|
From: | Brian Mathis |
Subject: | Re: Reply to header |
Date: | Tue, 02 Nov 2004 13:55:59 -0500 |
User-agent: | Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) |
Hendrik Mangels wrote:
Suso Banderas (2004-11-02, 17:35):While we're on the subject of modifying the screen list. It would be nice if a Reply-To: address@hidden header line was added.http://www.mutt.org/doc/manual/manual-3.html#listsSigh, I know. I already use G and r for replying, I was trying to avoid using L. I guess I just don't think of mutt in that way (using different reply keys for different things). Most other lists I'm on just have a Reply-To: header instead. I thought I might be able to get you guys to agree to do this. But if not, no big deal.http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html Hendrik
Yes yes, that site is very popular. It absolves anyone from making a real argument for or against Reply-To. None of the arguments presented there are incredibly strong, and certainly none are strong enough to uphold the blanket statement "no one should ever use Reply-To". There's also: http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.mhtml Bottom line is that every list should make that decision on their own. My view is that most lists *should* be using Reply-To:, because the main point of a mailing list is to talk to everyone on the list. Replying to a specific author is rare, while replying to a thread is very common. I've been on many lists with frequent messages that start like: Please use the 'reply all' button to send messages to the list. I'm forwading your message to the list because I think you meant to send it there. The frequency of those posts is a good indicator that people use the reply button most of the time. The expectation that people will change their behavior by using a special button to reply to a list instead of the regular reply button is flawed. You cannot expect people to change ingrained behavior because of some esoteric and dubious argument about correctness.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |