On Friday 29 July 2005 18:50, Stan Goodman wrote:
** Reply to message from jdd sur free <jdanield@free.fr> on Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:21:45 +0200
[I wrote]
My vote is for leaving things exactly as they are.
I agree.
+1 jdd
Which goes to show that there is no way to please everyone, and perhaps also that change is sometimes difficult to tolerate.
It doesn't show either of those. It shows that those two people have chosen to state that they agree with my point of view. I contest that the behaviour of the current configuration actually pleases those who suggest a change _more_ than the behaviour resulting from that change would. They just think it would, and are mistaken. Anyway, this is now way OT, so should move to the OT list or stop altogether - I won't post again in this list on the topic.
Personally, I think the present arrangement is the worst possible -- but then, I am as much entitled to express a view as anyone else.
Of course :) ... but _thankfully_ the list is not run "democratically" (meaning, in this context, an automatic referendum with one member one vote on technical matters such as the configuration of the listserver). (My initial "I vote for..." comment was intended to make that point, albeit obliquely...) Just to maximise off-topicity, and completely at a tangent: http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/dec/23.htm
Among other things, the mere fact that the addressing arrangement differs from most other mailing lists on the planet speaks against it, from my _personal_ point of view.
I wonder if you apply the "I agree with the majority" approach in other areas. And re most other mailing lists: I'm not a member of many at the moment, but the five which I read all work the same way (in KMail at least) as suse-linux-e: Reply replies to the list, I have to hit "reply to author" to reply to the originator of the mail. None of those lists sets a Reply-to field (was that the original suggestion? I can't remember now :)
One of the great advantages of getting this forum as a newsgoup is that one sees it threaded.
Er, anyone using a mail client dating from the modern age can choose to do that too. This puzzled me though. If you see it as a newsgroup, surely your news client allows you to "followup to group" (i.e. send a reply to the list), or to "reply to sender". In that case, how does the current configuration cause you any problems? (you said you'd prefer the change: why?)
I don't have to evaluate each and every message for interest, for example, I can treat a whold thread as a unit.
On a forum as active as this one, which threatens to flood my mailbox with its traffic, this is a non-trivial advantage.
Er, of course it is. So filter the list in to its own folder so it doesn't obscure your other mail (and this is _not_ a high traffic mailing list, by the way). I'm thinking you haven't used a decent mail client, since most of the reasons you give for agreeing with the reply-to change (or for choosing to read the list in a ng) are only necessary to work around shortcomings which don't exist in any good mail program.
Posting through the newgroup is equally trouble free.
It's great that there are enough alternatives to suit nearly everyone.
Chacun a son gout Na vkus i na svet, tovarishchei nyet De gustibus non est disputandum 'Al ta'am ve'al reah., asur lehitvakeah. Different strokes for different folks
Well, that's fine as long as those whose taste is derived from a lower level of technical understanding are not allowed to reach a position of power which allows them to impose technically inferior solutions on those with more understanding of the matter in hand. That seems to be the case here at present, so all's well. -- Bill