[ale] ALE reply-to changes needed??

[Joe]

Benjamin Scherrey <scherrey at proteus-tech.com> writes:

> Indeed - when you reply to a posting on a mailing list - it should go to the damn list. Its pretty 
> obvious! There's the ever-present [ale] in the subject to remind you. Now, to help those that cannot 
> pay attention, I am being asked to have to make the extra effort to alter the "To:" field anytime I 
> want to reply onlist to a posting and keep the conversation public (which is the whole point of 
> having a list).

Actually, you're only being asked to use your client's "Reply all" function
rather than the "Reply to sender only". Editing the To: in order to remove
redundant recipients is optional, IMO. I frequently get two copies of messages
when I post to lists that *don't* munge Reply-to, and I really couldn't
care less.

That said, I've gotten used to the way things are now, so I don't much
care whether it changes or not. +1-1.

> That's very silly and the result will be more unresolved threads and less posting in 
> general.

I think the only way you could significantly reduce the traffic on ALE
is to drop a nuke on Atlanta :-) (Incidentally, that was not IN ANY
WAY intended as any kind of terrorist threat.) Actually, it seems to
me that traffic has actually dropped a bit since the Reply-to munging
went into effect, which is counterintuitive (and maybe just wrong; I
don't have numbers to prove it).

Another point is that I don't think we ever actually voted on this issue
before; I seem to recall that it was a side-effect of changing list
management software.

Cheers,

-- Joe Knapka
_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale at ale.org
http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale