[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Reply to header

From: Buddy Burden
Subject: Re: Reply to header
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:00:28 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (X11/20040917)


Well, I'm glad I finally got to read that. I've always wondered why people were so rabid about this issue. Let's see what points this fellow makes ...

The Principle of Minimal Munging: Geez, how old is this article? I can hardly consider using a reply-to header "munging".

It Adds Nothing: Completely ignores the entire point, which is that yes, there is a way to reply to the author only, and yes, there is a way to reply to both the author and the list (which is _completely_ useless, since it double-replies), but there is no way to reply to only the list.

It Makes Things Break: Rhetoric. It _does_ remove the ability to easily reply to only the author, true, but to refer to that as "breaking" something is merely inflammatory.

Freedom of Choice: Now this _would_ be a good point, except that I thought what Suso was suggesting was that we all agree on doing something (or not). So in this case the "fascist sysadmin" argument doesn't really apply.

Can't Find My Way Back Home: Again, completely ignores the entire point. If we _were_ (and I'm not saying that we will, or even that we should) to decide that it would be most appropriate for people to reply to the list rather than the author, then it wouldn't matter what the original author's reply-to header was.

Coddling the Brain-Dead, Penalizing the Conscientious: Geez, how old is this article? I don't think _anyone_ wants to implement the feature because their mail client lacks a "reply all" key.

Principle of Least Work: Ummm ... that's exactly the same argument I would make about how much work it is to reply to only the list. I also vote for doing what makes it easiest.

Principle of Least Surprise: Well, that's _almost_ a good point. But I'm not sure how many people would actually be surprised by the behaviour of replying to a mailing list sending a reply to the mailing list.

Principle of Least Damage: Under "It Adds Nothing", the author says it's just as easy to reply to the list, but now he claims that it ought not be easy to reply to the list? Hunh?

And in the End ...: Isn't that the exact same argument as pointing out that mutt had to add a special command just to get around the fact that people refuse to do this?

All in all, I'm not impressed by this article. But I'm glad I got a chance to read it.

                -- Buddy

reply via email to

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