Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (3666 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [SLE] An apology to the list
  • From: Jeffrey Laramie <suse-linux-e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 08:50:54 -0500
  • Message-id: <200503030850.54811.suse-linux-e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Thursday 03 March 2005 06:42, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Kevanf1 <kevanf1@xxxxxxxxx> [03-03-05 04:36]:
> > In which case we don't have a democratic list?
>
> That *is* correct. The list is a service provided by SuSE for the
> discussion about SuSE Linux in English

I think we all agree here.

> and subject to their whim.

I certainly hope this is not true. Any company which set rules for their
*customers* on a whim will not last. While they are the list administrators
the list is provided for our benefit. This is our list. We support the
product, we contribute code, and we pay the salaries of the management and
some of the coders with our purchases and subscriptions. We have every right
to let them know when we are happy/unhappy with one of their policies.

>
> > It is my belief that if a problem is identified in a mailing list then
> > it should be discussed. The reason for this thread.
>
> Did you read the "WELCOME to suse-linux-e@xxxxxxxx" mail you received
> when you subscribed?
>
> <quote>
> Q7. Why do my replies go to the original poster and not the list?
> A7. There is a more complete answer in FAQ, but the short answer
> is that it's better this way. Trust us on this one, please.
> </quote>

It been awhile since I got the "Welcome" message and I don't remember seeing
this. In any case, I find this patronizing.

>
> and from the suse-linux-e-faq@xxxxxxxx
>
> <quote>
> Q2. Why do my replies go to the original poster and not the list?
> A2. We do not "munge" the mail headers by inserting
> a "Reply-To: suse-linux-e@xxxxxxxx" because it makes it more
> difficult subscribers to handle the mail the way they want to.
> Your mail client probably has a "reply" function as well as a
> "reply to all" or "reply to list" one; Please use the latter if
> you want you message to go to the list and not just to the
> original poster.

As previously discussed, many popular mail clients don't have this feature.
Their way is in fact more difficult and inconvenient for many users and this
reasoning is no longer valid. Standards evolve and if "munging" has become
the standard, which it apparently has, then it's time this list started
following it.

>
> Also, please don't complain about this on the list, it has
> been discussed many, many, many times in the past already.

Did it ever occur to them that if they were getting lots of complaints that
there might be a problem? Perhaps they should tell us *who* we should
complain to. Someone with the authority to make a decision on this and not
the/dev/null of the postmaster.

>
> For background information see
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
>
> New! Even Sourceforge has turned to the dark side:
> http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=6693&group_id=1
> </quote>

This is actually amusing in a sad way. Even the administrator admits this
configuration is the "dark side". I think the list admin would be wise to
take a survey of members (read *customers*) and see which way suits our needs
best. If that means it stays the way it is, so be it.

>
> > I further believe that if enough members - the majority who are willing
> > to stand up and actually say something (useful) - wish a change to be
> > made then that change should be seriously investigated and perhaps put
> > to a vote. Nothing should ever be set absolutely in stone things do
> > evolve after all.
>
> Again, is not negotiable.

Ah, but this is a business, and in business, Patrick, everything is
negotiable.

Jeff

< Previous Next >