In its current form, you need to 'reply-all' to mailing list and the list administrator will make sure the poster's email address is in a special list such that the poster not receive two copies. Occasionally, someone may request his/her email address be added to the special list, yet again. What a hassle! Why the administrator wants all this hassle for nothing?!
It puzzled me in the past. It still puzzles me now. To my simple mind, the benefits of setting reply-to header to the list is so obvious:
- less keystrokes for the list members. Many modern MUA (Mail User Agent) has default to 'reply' instead of 'reply-to-all', esp. web-mail UI.
- less unnecessary mental note to reply-to-all instead of reply, or to copy list's address to CC if you already hit 'reply'
- no missing discussion
- consistently threaded discussion in archive and in live discussion. A post sent to the poster alone was often seen forwarded to the list, as an after-thought and after-fact good intention efforts. The thread is then broken, making it extreme difficult to follow a discussion you found an interesting excerpts by googling.
- Some said it is hard to be done.
- Some insisted that it is philosophically wrong to reply-to the list. <= Hello, the purpose of subscribing to a mailing list is to publish to and read from the list, not to find sensible partners to conduct private conversations!
- Some insists reply-to-all is great enough and is the only sensible way, so they went ahead to hack their mail clients (MUA) to detect whether a message is post or private message and automate to save the unnecessary keystrokes.
- Well, maybe some of these people just accept the dysfunctional setting as the inevitable fact of life, and just find a get-around and moved on. If so, it is pretty sad.
No comments:
Post a Comment