From: "Anders Johansson" <andjoh@rydsbo.net>
On Monday 14 August 2006 23:32, Felix Miata wrote:
The RFC is deficient in presuming anyone knows the meaning of "author". I really don't care who wrote the content. I only care who sent it to me. The writer of the content did not send it to me, so I really don't care what he wants or what his headers included or not. The listserv sent it to me, so as far as I'm concerned, until a distinction is made in the RFC for list mail, the listserv is the author, not the content writer.
Ah yes, and of course the US Post Office is the author of Time Magazine, right?
A *distribution* list is the official name of what we refer to as "mailing list". It distributes email to people who say they want them (by subscribing to the distribution list). It doesn't author anything, and saying it does is not even debatable, it's just flat out wrong
The USPS is a conduit. It is not a remailer service. If you send a letter to Jill via USPS she gets it and nobody else gets copies. If, then, Jill collates the contents of your letter with a collection of other letters, makes as many copies as there were contributors and mails out the collection the usual usage for such Amateur Press Association operations is that replies go back to Jill and are collated into the next distribution or "distie". This is a very common newsletter technique. This group fits that sort of definition. You send one note to the list. The LIST sends out several copies of your note. Generally the list benefits if answers go to the list rather than to the original sender. Therefore I feel the DEFAULT action should be to email the list with extra action required to move into private email. Otherwise, why bother to have a list? {^_^} Joanne