Patrick Shanahan wrote:
Linda, *you* are full of crap!
Patrick, your courtesy and knowledge of internet standards is noted. While mine may be dated, yours is still wrong. Anton Aylward wrote:
That's a weak and ridiculous argument, Linda. If it were so then every last message of mine you're replied to, or that anyone else had relied to, would have had duplicates. That hasn't been happening.
Because people on this list are taught to violate internet standards. Carlos E. R. wrote:
Linda, first you are using obsolete mail software. You are using "Thunderbird/2.0.0.24", instead of current version 17. Thus you haven't noticed that Thunderbird displays a button to "Reply to list".
True, but the new version has other problems that I haven't had time or wanted to allocate time to deal with.
How the list is setup is done is correct, known, documented, and fixed in stone. The list does not set a reply-to. You are free to do it if you like.
You are right.
It is considered polite here, if you don't have a "reply to list" button, to use the "reply to all" button, then to delete the direct address to the other poster. Don't make excuses on how the list is setup or how your software is setup: it is simply the polite thing to do.
No -- it is not "polite", it is considered a violation of internet standards, and is advised NOT to do, because many people expect to get 2 copies on a reply to all and file them differently. When you violate that standard, documented behavior, you create "surprises". (either people don't get emails they were expecting, or they get 2 copies). See below for old standards, new standards, and the standard way to deal with duplicate messages. ==== Not according to RFC 822. 4.4.4. AUTOMATIC USE OF FROM / SENDER / REPLY-TO For systems which automatically generate address lists for replies to messages, the following recommendations are made: o If the "Reply-To" field exists, then the reply should go to the addresses indicated in that field and not to the address(es) indicated in the "From" field. o If there is a "From" field, but no "Reply-To" field, the reply should be sent to the address(es) indicated in the "From" field. This recommendation is intended only for automated use of originator-fields and is not intended to suggest that replies may not also be sent to other recipients of messages. It is up to the respective mail-handling programs to decide what additional facilities will be provided. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ---- This was updated to RFC 2822 which says Reply-To is at the USER's discretion -- where they would like the email response to be sent. RFC 2822: The originator fields also provide the information required when replying to a message. When the "Reply-To:" field is present, it indicates the mailbox(es) to which the author of the message suggests that replies be sent. In the absence of the "Reply-To:" field, replies SHOULD by default be sent to the mailbox(es) specified in the "From:" field unless otherwise specified by the person composing the reply. Then Under a page "Munging Reply-to still considered harmful" http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html It talks about the problem of getting two copies -- and the solution is with the receiver: Getting two copies of the same email ------------------------------------ Some people complain that they'll get two copies of the same email. Since they're on the list, their first copy is the one sent to them by the list. When the responder hit "reply all", it also put their email address in the recipient list, so they get a second copy directly. Fortunately, there's already a technical solution to this. Since all mail clients put a unique Message-ID header field on their email, a mail reader has only to compare the Message-ID of a message to previously-recieved messages. If it's the same, then the second message is a duplicate and can be safely ignored. If your mail reader doesn't do this, that's too bad, but it's not an excuse to violate Internet standards and surprise people with inconsistent behavior, just to prevent you from having to delete a few emails. Anyone who gets any spam at all knows how to delete email. ---- The above says clearly to respond to ALL AND NOT delete the second copy -- as it causes inconsistent behavior. This is what I said in my original message. The stuff about Reply-To is obviously dated, but the initial directions still hold true. Don't force everyone who responds to you to adapt to something goes against the standards. The problem I have is I have problems typing in forms and such and make mistakes. So when I go editing fields in the "To" areas, I sometimes get wrong addresses. Besides, I really like getting the extra copy when someone responds to me -- it can allow me to give them a more timely response. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org