On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 07:44:26 +0200, James Harper  
<james.harper AT bendigoit.com DOT au> wrote:

> Mike Holden writes:
>
>> Dan Langille wrote:
>> > This is standard practice on this list.  If you wish to participate,
>> > please ensure you account for this practice.
>>
>> You may see it as "standard" practice, but it's certainly not encouraged
>> practice, and probably only a handful of users do it that way (i.e.
>> wrongly). Some people lazily hit "reply all" and don't bother to check
>> what they are doing. I admit I've done it myself on occasion, either
>> through haste or forgetfulness or distraction, but I do at least __try__
>> to do it properly!

Couldn't agree more.


> I hit reply-all all the time. What MTA are you using that can't sort out
> duplicates for you?

The exact same complaint that Dan made (don't make your spam problem our  
spam problem) could be levelled at anyone advocating using a specific MTA  
or alternative mail service to fix duplicate replies: don't make your  
(personal) list practice our duplicate mail problem. At least do it as an  
exception, not as a rule.

> The reason I use reply-all is that the sender is not necessarily going
> to receive a copy in their inbox otherwise. They may be subscribed in
> 'digest' mode, or may have their subscription configured to not receive
> a copy at all, which allows them to post and then read the messages via
> the archives.

In every such case it's their own responsility to make sure they see  
replies, and if they prefer to receive both private/list, they can ask for  
it. By your reasoning everyone reading in digest mode and quoting the  
whole digest (and top quoting, leaving everyone else to figure out message  
order, what the reply is to etc.) should also be excused.

> I imagine that wouldn't be an uncommon configuration
> either - say you were responsible for a server running Xen, also running
> Debian, using Bacula for backups, Apache as a web server, MySQL as a
> database, and PHP as a scripting engine, and occasionally asked
> questions on those mailing lists when the need arose. You'd spend half
> of your day just processing email if you actually received all of those
> lists into your inbox!

So how does receiving extra mail to process to your private, not as easily  
filtered mailbox help there? :)

The spam problem will never be solved until human nature changes. I now  
happily refer you to the 'your solution to the spam problem will not work  
because' standard form

http://craphound.com/spamsolutions.txt


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users