ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: the most obvious failure in To-NoReply

2004-09-01 19:13:02

In <301DEB75-FB87-11D8-B65D-000393DB5366(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> Keith 
Moore <moore(_at_)cs(_dot_)utk(_dot_)edu> writes:

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.

Actually, munging Reply-To works quite well in closed lists, or in lists
such as this one where there are extended threads on some topics and which
are not really suited to contributors who are not subscribed to the list
(who will usually see no more than than a few messages at the start of a
thread, if that).

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.

It is pretty close to the same thing in some lists (see above).
 
 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.

I think the ability for a MUA to know whether it is replying to a list is
highly desirable (whether by detecting the presence of List-* headers or
otherwise).


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.

Indeed. There is a great variety of mailing lists, and one solution might
not fit all. But that is no reason not to provide solutions for those
cases where they seem to be needed.

        
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.

And that is exactly the problem (and the same problem exists on Usenet,
where some posters like personal replies as well as followups, and others
abhor them). So the first thing that is clear is that users need some
means to indicate which class they belong to (and Mail-Copies-To:
nobody/poster, though not elegant, does provide precisely that).

-- 
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


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>