ISTM that the only reason that people use Reply-to-All when responding to
mailing lists is that it is the only way of ensuring (without inspecting
the headers carefully and cutting/pasting as necessary) that the reply
goes to the list at least.
I don't know why you believe that.
Because, except in the case where the list-maintainer automatically
inserts Reply-To (a usage often deprecated, though I find it appropriate
in many lists that I use), Reply-to-All is the only thing that guarantees
that the reply gets sent to the list. Simple Reply will usually just
respond to the author.
Therefore, users who want a quiet life and cannot be botherd to
cut-and-paste (which is most of us) just hit Reply-to-All, a practice
which means duplicate copies to the author and accusations of
obnoxiousness. That is the whole problem we are discussing, with a view to
find some better method.
Okay, I get that. What I don't buy is the assertion that "the only reason
people
use Reply-to-All" is that they want replies to go to the list at least. I find
Reply-to-All useful in a much wider variety of situations than that, and I also
find that I get a lot of replies-to-all in mail that isn't sent to any list.
Keith