In <20B25E2E-1C5D-11D9-B7F9-000393DB5366(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> Keith
Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:
Actually some people are proposing blind acceptance. They want MFT to
be honored automagically, regardless of the content of the reply.
They want MFT to be honored when the replier uses the Reply-to-List
button. If the replier wants to reply to the author "off-list", as is
sometimes useful, then he hits "Reply" (which is why the Reply-To field
is no substitute for a distinct MFT field). And if he wants to compose
something else he hits "Reply-to-All" and picks and chooses from the
selection of addresses on offer.
The duplicated message problem is broader than that. And no, MFT
doesn't solve even that subset of the problem - at least, not without
creating other problems.
a) have both list addresses appear in To or CC of the original message
b) recipients use "reply all" to reply to both lists.
It's also the only way for the replier to respond if he wants to ensure
that all recipients of the subject message receive the reply. The
replier should not assume that honoring MFT will produce the same
result.
Honoring MFT is not intended to produce the same result. If a MUA has been
upgraded to understand MFT, then it needs to have a separate Reply-to-List
button.
Yup, it's a problem. But MFT has several problems also. If an author
has multiple MUAs he needs to configure each of them to be aware of
MFT.
Yes. But if he is not fussy, then he can leave it to the mail-expander to
insert the MFT according to the list policy.
.... Much
simpler to
avoid sending the duplicates in the first place.
It's simpler in some sense. But it makes repliers responsible for
fixing a problem that is on the sender's end.
What problem on the Sender's end do you have in mind? That he might set
MFT to president(_at_)whitehouse(_dot_)gov?
It hides the fact that
the replier intended for certain recipients to receive a copy of the
message. It makes it difficult for a replier to know whether the
recipients omitted by MFT will actually receive that message.
If the replier is fussy, then he will use "Reply-to-All" and edit it the
hard way.
--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133 Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: chl(_at_)clerew(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave,
CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5