<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body ><div><div></div><div>I would go so far as to say that any MUA where you cant manually update the recipient list is more broken than the mailing list config.</div><div><br></div><div>Reply direct causes many recipients to receIve multiple copies of measages in a thread as theyll get the list copy as well as the direct one. </div><div><br></div><div>If the mailing list is intended to be conversational I tend to revert to what is most commonly used and thus most convenient. Reply-list it is for me personally and many others I know.</div><div><br></div><div>I too have run and hosted many mailing lists over many years and I humbly suggest that the list host/administrator gets to configure this as they prefer, and calling their preferred system broken merely because your preferences are different, is unfair.</div><div><br></div><div>Mark.</div><div>(Speaking personally only)</div><div><br></div><div><div style="font-size:9px;color:#575757">Sent from Samsung Mobile</div></div></div><br><br>-------- Original message --------<br>From: Marc MERLIN <marc@merlins.org> <br>Date:12/01/2015 21:28 (GMT+12:00) <br>To: Jethro Carr <jethro.carr@jethrocarr.com>,George Patterson <george.patterson@gmail.com> <br>Cc: Delegate Chat list for LCA2015 <chat@lists.lca2015.linux.org.au> <br>Subject: Re: [LCA2015-Chat] reply-to all on lists always was broken and
still is broken, please revert <br><br>On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 10:45:02PM +1300, Jethro Carr wrote:<br>> > year.<br>> > http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/listreplyto.html<br>> > <br>> > Can someone please revert this breakage?<br>> <br>> One person’s breakage is another person’s feature.<br><br>Yes, mostly preventing reply to author for some Email clients is a<br>feature.<br><br>(and not that it means anything, but I've been a mail and list admin,<br>including sourceforge with 100K+ lists, so I have some experience with<br>all sides of this, there and back, and got the tshirt)<br><br>On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 09:08:27PM +1100, George Patterson wrote:<br>> I'd be reluctant to change it this week but could be on the list for later<br>> consideration.<br>> <br>> In my opinion, those that do not sanity check the reply list before sending<br>> an email is asking for trouble.<br><br>I do, but if I use my cell phone, it's really a pain to have to manually<br>override a reply-to I didn't ask for and doesn't belong.<br>Besides, it's bad to randomly change the behaviour of clients from the<br>server side. That is sure asking for trouble or at least creating<br>confusion, at best.<br><br>But yeah, you already knew that :)<br><br>Marc<br>-- <br>"A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A.S.R.<br>Microsoft is to operating systems ....<br> .... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking<br>Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/ | PGP 1024R/763BE901<br>_______________________________________________<br>Chat mailing list<br>Chat@lists.lca2015.linux.org.au<br>http://lists.lca2015.linux.org.au/mailman/listinfo/chat<br></body>