At 17:35 2003-02-18 -0600, David W. Tamkin did say:
The note I'd add to the text of my copy is to be extra careful not to send
the reply both publicly and privately, because the author is the kind who
really hates to get a privately mailed copy of a post to a list.
Actually, dealing with the nimrods who address the poster AND list is easy
enough using procmail (discard messages not _through_ the procmail list
which list it as one of the cleartext recipients). I still mark messages
containing my address as a cleartext recipient as "needing my attention" as
they were directly addressed. The real problem is dealing with the people
who post a question to the list, to which you reply on-list, and then they
reply to that entirely offlist as if you're a free one-on-one tech support
person for them.
Surely other frequent posters here have had this happen - someone insists
on carrying on directly with you because you were thoughtful enough to
answer their original question, and once that starts, you're stuck having
to reply to them instead of figuring that someone else can followup on some
other matter relating to their question (which they can't, because at this
point, the person is carrying on offlist). Failing to respond is
inconsiderate, and posting that you don't want to provide support offlist
also frequently gets the freeloader up in arms with you.
This is *MUCH* more of an issue with newbies.
Actually, I think I'd just strip Reply-To: from the head and move it to
the top of the body. There it would catch my attention.
Decent solution - provided you've got that caffeine running through your
system. I generally notice the addresses in the To: field when I've
clicked [reply] though. <g>
- Sean ( "that kind" ) Straw
Sean B. Straw / Professional Software Engineering
Procmail disclaimer: <http://www.professional.org/procmail/disclaimer.html>
Please DO NOT carbon me on list replies. I'll get my copy from the list.
procmail mailing list