[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] "reply all" etiquette: reply-all vs. reply'ing to l

From: Andrew Suffield
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] "reply all" etiquette: reply-all vs. reply'ing to list
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 05:50:24 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040818i

On Sun, Sep 26, 2004 at 07:03:10PM -0500, John Meinel wrote:
> >Actually that's the single *worst* result I have ever
> >encountered. Then you get one personal copy, and *no* list copies, so
> >no copy winds up in the list folder and there's not a damn thing you
> >can do about it (you receive no mails which contain enough information
> >to file them properly). Thread history is completely messed up.
> >
> >
> Actually, I have mine set to Yes, and I don't seem to have the 
> catastrophic disaster that you seem to state.
> My mailer (Thunderbird) seems to handle things coming into my inbox, and 
> then me manually moving it into the list folder.

I do not have a spare gnome to manually file all my mail.

> Also, if someone does "reply-all" then there still would be a 
> 'gnu-arch-users' in the To or CC fields.
> I use the current procmail filter:
> :0
> * ^(To|Cc).*gnu-arch-users
> lists/gnu-arch-users

Filtering based on the inaccurate To/Cc fields is just wrong.

> Now, I still would prefer if gau set itself in the Reply-To so that the 
> default reply goes to list.

Reply-To mangling considered harmful.

  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' : |
 `. `'                          |
   `-             -><-          |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]