[sf-lug] Ubuntu release ("back on-list" sub thread)
jim at well.com
Sun Apr 27 22:13:49 PDT 2008
sometimes discussions get a bit frothy,
possibly too frothy. please be mindful that
many reading our threads are hoping to harvest
useful information and may be put off by
let's take care as to both what we're
saying and how we're saying it. get facts
right before clicking send, and be gentle.
forgiving and forgetting is good practice.
On Sun, 2008-04-27 at 21:17 -0700, Rick Moen wrote:
> Quoting bobbie sellers (bliss at california.com):
> > Of course I am totally ignorant of technical matters but I belong
> > to two other mailing lists run on different softwares which enable the
> > reply to all as standard....
> No, reply semantics is always and everywhere the same.
> 1. Your "Reply" command reaches just the sender.
> 2. Your "Reply-to-All" reaches the sender plus his/her other addresses.
> You should always use Reply-to-All when responding to ongoing mailing
> list threads. Use Reply _only_ when you have some compelling reason to
> depart from the mailing list into private mail (and then please do
> explain your sudden insistence on having a private discussion with
> someone who thought he/she was participating in a public one).
> The only mailing lists on which that doesn't work are those going out of
> their way to sabotage your ability to send private replies. On those, you
> must take manual further steps to overcome the artificial obstacle.
> (That scenario is illustrated below.)
> > ...which through Thunderbird permit me to reply to individuals.
> False. Let's say that Alice sends mail to an SF-LUG list that munges
> Reply-To:. She composes:
> From: Alice
> To: sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> Her mail hits the mailing list software, which auto-appends a forced
> Reply-To: header, as follows, and then remails a copy to
> bliss at california.com (with a different exterior envelope header, not
> From: alice
> To: sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> Reply-To: sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
> Please notice that, obscuratanist technopeasant drivel by Ernest about
> the mailing list address being the true "sender" notwithstanding, that
> is in fact _not_ the case: Alice remains the sender.
> You (bliss at california.com) duly receive your copy in Thunderbird, and
> you hit "r" to "reply to individuals" -- which fails, because
> Thunderbird, honouring the Reply-To:, redirects your private mail back
> onto the mailing list. The _only_ way, in that scenario, you are able
> to send offlist mail to Alice is by manually intervening to throw away
> the default reply address (which means you must first notice that you've
> been sabotaged in your intent to send private mail), and substituting
> Alice's address, e.g., from your address book or by typing it in. Or,
> equivalently, you could eschew reply commands entirely and use
> Thunderbird's "forward" command, again putting in Alice's address
> manually (e.g., from your address book or by typing it in).
> Either way, you are having to perform extra work to get around munging's
> sabotaging of private replies.
> > This list is the first where I have to make sure I pick the mailing list
> > address....
> No. Wrong. You do not have to "pick the mailing list address". Just
> use your mail program's Reply-to-All command, as above.
> sf-lug mailing list
> sf-lug at linuxmafia.com
More information about the sf-lug