John Summerfield <debian(a)herakles.homelinux.org> writes:
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> I'm not going to get into this discussion again, other than to refer
> you to the previous thread
>
>
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-xen/2007-May/msg00021.html
That's one reply I did not see. I have seen the article it links to,
and I don't agree with some of its basic assumptions.
This tired topic has been discussed to death many times over on many
lists, including this one. I wouldn't expect agreement to jump at us
out of the bushes now.
> To quote Markus
>
> "This just replaces one set of problems with a different set of
> arguably worse problems, shifting the annoyance from one set of people
> (which includes John) to another set (which includes me)."
>
> So no, it won't be changing.
If all email clients shipped by RH and Fedora were "reasonable
mailers" as assumed by Chip, I really wouldn't care so much.
I could almost cope if the version of mailman Red Hat's using would
gaily send me so-called duplicates, but it won't. I've checked my
configuration.
Whatever _I_ do, I miss replies others make. If you, Dan, choose
"group reply" or "reply to all,"[1] I often don't get it.
I've never
seen value in off-list replies, except for very rare cases where,
maybe highlighting someone's ignorance might embarrass them, but they
need to be put straight.
I don't understand how you miss replies *often*. Can you identify the
conditions that make you miss a reply? If you can, we might be able
to help you fix that.
I for one would be happy if my email address never went to email
lists; the fact it does is the reason I need to apply antispam to this
domain.
Tough.
[1] I don't see the point of those wrt _this_ list. Mutt users
might
try L to reply to the list.
[...]
You cannot reply off-list:-)
I consider that bad manners. Discussion of manners, however, is quite
off-topic on this list. Feel free to reply to me personally.