Lamar Owen wrote:
Where likewise the only place I've ever seen complaints are the ones
that don't adjust the reply-to, yet the complaints are always met with
'it's morally wrong to do that..'.
I've seen both; I run several lists here, and I have had more requests to drop
the 'reply-to: list' option than to add it back in.
Must be different lists. I can understand wanting to default to
off-list replies on certain topics, but not for technical lists. And I
count the complaints from people who don't like the CC: that everyone
gets when the reply-to isn't adjusted back to the list and you have to
reply-all to make it work at all as being in favor of the re-write.
Again: it's up to the
list owners, and no one else.
I haven't demanded that anyone change - just pointed out good reasons
for doing so.
Doesn't that mean you have to jump around in the folders whenever a new
message comes in or you want to reply to something?
Let me recast that: it means rather than have all new incoming messages
obscure the really important non-list incoming messages, I have really
important e-mail come into a pretty clean inbox, and when I have a break
(like right now) I can, in a subject-oriented manner, read and reply. I find
it to be much more efficient to dispose of 60-100 messages in a row on the
same subject than to have them all interspersed in my inbox, which needs to
stay clean so that important messages get quick dispositions.
Oh - I use different accounts completely for work/home/list related
stuff but I want the lists all in the same spot.
I don't have time
for that.
I wonder what the statistics for all your replies to this list and the CentOS
list would say about your time availability. Or mine, for that matter.
Mine might indicate that I don't waste a lot of time configuring my mail
client - or that I am not tied to a single location or client for
reading/replies.
And I'm getting ready to clean
it out; the archive will likely be left with less than 1,000 messages
that have enough meat to be considered worthy of keeping around.
That's why I send it all through gmail...
What does gmail have to do with the S/N ratio of this list (note that the
16,000 messages I received in the last month did not include spam, of which
over 100,000 messages were dropped)?
The space/size (and spam) becomes someone else's problem, and the way
I'm using it now (POP to an intermediate IMAP server) I can delete my
copy as I go but could still go back with the web interface to search
for anything if it matters later (they 'archive' it as downloaded,
instead of deleting). I'm not sure how this will work with straight
IMAP access though, which is one of the reasons I haven't switched yet.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
