Re: the most obvious failure in To-NoReply

> > > I don't want _replies_ to go to ietf-822(_at_)imc(_dot_)org(_dot_) I want 
> > > _followups_
> > > to go to ietf-822(_at_)imc(_dot_)org(_dot_)
> > "followup" is a Usenet term.  Usenet has two different kinds of
> > addresses - email addresses and newsgroups.
> But mail also has two different kinds of addresses or, to put it 
> another
> way, mailing lists certainly need two kinds of addresses:
>
> 1. From: To: Cc: Bcc: etc.
> 2. List-Post: Mail-Followup-To: (which not all lists, including this 
> one,
> provide :-( )
Having lists mung mail-followup-to is every bit as bad as having lists 
mung reply-to.  actually it's worse, since one of the arguments in 
favor of mail-followup-to is that it hasn't been corrupted like 
reply-to has.
> MUAs then need some form of command for "Reply-To-List", and the 
> obvious
> name for that command is "Followup" (or the single letter 'F').
No, it's not obvious.  Even though you can gateway mail into news and 
vice versa, in practice the differences between the two environments 
affect how people interact with those environments.  A followup is not 
the same thing as reply-to-list (using list-post) or even reply-to-all. 
 If email had a way to distinguish list addresses from personal 
addresses, something analogous to followup might be "reply to just the 
lists".  but even then it would still be different.
In Usenet there is an implicit assumption that everyone participating 
in a conversation has access to at least one of the newsgroups 
involved.  That, and participants can be subscribed to a usenet 
newsgroup without filling up their inboxes with cruft.
in email it is much less reasonable to assume that everyone in a 
conversation can access any mailing list that is copied on the 
conversation - not all mailing lists are public, and people are less 
likely to be willing to subscribe to an email list than to a usenet 
newsgroup.
Also, usenet articles automagically expire after a time, whereas emails 
typically have to be deleted explicitly, and this also affects how 
people interact with each medium.
> And responses to mailing lists should be followups too.
>
> >  Email
> > does not have visibly different kinds of addresses and does make a
> > distinction between replies and followups.
> And that is exactly the root of the problem, which needs to be fixed.
somehow I don't view the fact that email isn't like usenet as "a 
problem".  I'd call it "a feature".  email lists certainly are not a 
perfect discussion medium, but usenet is even less so.  the truth is 
that people find both kinds of discussions useful, and they also find 
it useful that they operate differently than one another.  trying to 
make them the same is probably a disservice to both.
> >  Email UAs have "reply" and
> > "reply to all" or similar.  For several reasons including both 
> > protocol
> > differences and cultural differences between email and Usenet, email's
> > "reply to all" and Usenet's "followup" are not quite the same thing.
> > And I don't see evidence of any desire among users to make email more
> > like Usenet.  (actually I see plenty of evidence to the contrary.  
> > but I
> > digress.)
> On the contrary, in the case of mailing lists I see evidence of this
> desire all the time. It is just not clear whether the "proper" way to
> respond to a mailing list is "Reply" or "Reply-To-All", since both of 
> them
> usually do the Wrong Thing
you and the author of the subject message may not agree on the Right 
Thing.
> Personally, I find it extremely annoying to receive personal replies to
> messages I post to a mailing list to which I am already subscribed.
Personally, I find it extremely valuable to receive personal replies to 
messages I post to a mailing list to which I am already subscribed.   I 
find it annoying when recipients remove me from the recipient list of 
replies.  Personal replies are handled with a different priority than 
ordinary list mail.  I like having personal replies end up in my inbox, 
and also having a complete set of messages to the list end up in my 
folder for that list.  I also like being able to continue conversations 
between list participants quickly even when the list is slow to forward 
messages.
Keith