[OT] Re: Test mail to gnupg.user

[Ingo Klöcker]

On Sunday 13 June 2010, MFPA wrote:
> Hi
> 
> 
> On Sunday 13 June 2010 at 10:03:00 AM, in
> <mid:201006131103.01318 at thufir.ingo-kloecker.de>, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
> > IMNSHO, it's not up to the mailing list admins to
> > dictate where replies to my posts should go. Therefore,
> > the mailing list software should not touch the Reply-to
> > header.
> 
> As far as I know, this is the only list I have ever subscribed to
> that does not set a reply-to header to the list address. I'm not
> saying it is "right" or "wrong," just unique in my experience.
> 
> The admins don't "dictate" where replies go: the person replying does
> whatever they want.

True. But to do so the person replying has to decide whatever they want 
(reply to author or reply to list or reply to both). Also, not all MUAs 
make it easy to choose between reply to author or reply to list or reply 
to both. I'm not sure what the conclusion is. I guess the only sensible 
conclusion is using a decent MUA which gives the replier the choice. 
Optimizing the mailing list for crappy MUAs is just as wrong as 
optimizing web pages for crappy browsers.


> However, I would suggest that it *is* perfectly
> proper for the admins of any list to set headers that encourage
> posters (or their email software) to follow the etiquette of that
> group. In the case of GnuPG-users, that would perhaps be a reply-to
> header containing both the list address and the senders address.

Hmm, I never read anywhere that this would be the etiquette of this 
group. It's certainly not mentioned on the listinfo page of gnupg-users. 
Also, most people seem to reply to list only.


Regards,
Ingo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20100613/ccc75524/attachment.pgp>