I give up. trying to reply to messages on this list is tedious. I can't
pinpoint whether it's because the list is set up to make replies go to
the OP or the OP has his reply-to in his mail client set, or most people
are hitting the reply-to button instead of simply reply.

It just doesn't make sense to me, why be on the mailing list if it
hinders having a group discussion without having to jump through
hurdles. It also defeats the purpose of being on a group list if
replying sends the reply to the OP.

Every message sent to this list, simply hitting reply should send back
to this list and not the OP.
--
Blessings,
David M.


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

The reply-to header should be changed to php-general [at] lists.php.net.
I experience many dev list that are configured this way.
So, in my gmail i change my habit to press "a" instead of "r".

Shiplu Mokaddim
My talks, http://talk.cmyweb.net
Follow me, http://twitter.com/shiplu
SUST Programmers, http://groups.google.com/group/p2psust
Innovation distinguishes bet ... ... (ask Steve Jobs the rest)

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

David McGlone wrote:

> I give up. trying to reply to messages on this list is tedious. I
> can't pinpoint whether it's because the list is set up to make replie=
s
> go to the OP or the OP has his reply-to in his mail client set, or
> most people are hitting the reply-to button instead of simply reply.

Did you try "Reply-All" ? That usually does it for me.

> It just doesn't make sense to me, why be on the mailing list if it
> hinders having a group discussion without having to jump through
> hurdles. It also defeats the purpose of being on a group list if
> replying sends the reply to the OP.

Reply-All.



--
Per Jessen, Z=C3=BCrich (16.2=C2=B0C)


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 14:27, David McGlone <david [at] dmcentral.net> wrote:
> I give up. trying to reply to messages on this list is tedious. I can't
> pinpoint whether it's because the list is set up to make replies go to
> the OP or the OP has his reply-to in his mail client set, or most people
> are hitting the reply-to button instead of simply reply.

Then get a better email client if yours doesn't support "reply to all"
or "reply to group". It's hardly the mailing list's fault that your
client doesn't support that.

--
Daniel Egeberg

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Why change the way that has been around for years and adopted by
multiple e-mail lists?
It feels like it's more problem to change the way for thousands of
users just to satisfy a couple of few.

**********************************************
Hans =C3=85hlin
Tel: +46761488019
http://www.kronan-net.com/
irc://irc.freenode.net:6667 - TheCoin
**********************************************



2010/4/21 David McGlone <david [at] dmcentral.net>:
> I give up. trying to reply to messages on this list is tedious. I can't
> pinpoint whether it's because the list is set up to make replies go to
> the OP or the OP has his reply-to in his mail client set, or most people
> are hitting the reply-to button instead of simply reply.
>
> It just doesn't make sense to me, why be on the mailing list if it
> hinders having a group discussion without having to jump through
> hurdles. It also defeats the purpose of being on a group list if
> replying sends the reply to the OP.
>
> Every message sent to this list, simply hitting reply should send back
> to this list and not the OP.
> --
> Blessings,
> David M.
>
>
> --
> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

On 21 April 2010 14:38, Hans =C3=85hlin <ahlin.hans [at] kronan-net.com> wrote:
> Why change the way that has been around for years and adopted by
> multiple e-mail lists?
> It feels like it's more problem to change the way for thousands of
> users just to satisfy a couple of few.

David was venting based on a discussion in another thread. I'm pretty
sure he knows about the option to reply-all - that's part of the
reason for venting (it sends multiple emails instead of just the one
needed). The optimal scenario is to: 1) be able to quickly respond to
the list, as that's the normal action you want to do and 2) not spam
people with several emails for no reason (i.e. avoid replying to the
OP AND the list).

--
<hype>
WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fake51
BeWelcome: Fake51
Couchsurfing: Fake51
</hype>

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:42 +0200, Daniel Egeberg wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 14:27, David McGlone <david [at] dmcentral.net> wrote:
> > I give up. trying to reply to messages on this list is tedious. I can't
> > pinpoint whether it's because the list is set up to make replies go to
> > the OP or the OP has his reply-to in his mail client set, or most people
> > are hitting the reply-to button instead of simply reply.
>
> Then get a better email client if yours doesn't support "reply to all"
> or "reply to group". It's hardly the mailing list's fault that your
> client doesn't support that.

My email client does support "reply to all", but it's IMHO
inconsiderate.

Think about people that have to pay for every Mb they download. "reply
to all" causes these people to have to pay for duplicates.

Now if somebody on this list was paying for their downloads, then you
and I am costing them money by using "reply to all" and now there are 2
duplicate messages for them the download.

How would you feel if this was you?

--
Blessings,
David M.


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

--=-ZPy96I6epRrg9EbNBD7j
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:49 +0200, Peter Lind wrote:

> On 21 April 2010 14:38, Hans =C3=85hlin <ahlin.hans [at] kronan-net.com> wrote=
:
> > Why change the way that has been around for years and adopted by
> > multiple e-mail lists?
> > It feels like it's more problem to change the way for thousands of
> > users just to satisfy a couple of few.
>
> David was venting based on a discussion in another thread. I'm pretty
> sure he knows about the option to reply-all - that's part of the
> reason for venting (it sends multiple emails instead of just the one
> needed). The optimal scenario is to: 1) be able to quickly respond to
> the list, as that's the normal action you want to do and 2) not spam
> people with several emails for no reason (i.e. avoid replying to the
> OP AND the list).
>
> --
> <hype>
> WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind
> Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fake51
> BeWelcome: Fake51
> Couchsurfing: Fake51
> </hype>
>


As I mentioned earlier, the Evolution mail client has a reply to list
option which I've used to send this to the list. A decent email client
*will* have this option somewhere, but if anyone is using one that
doesn't, Evolution is available for the majority of operating systems
out there.

Thanks,
Ash
http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk



--=-ZPy96I6epRrg9EbNBD7j--

On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:49 +0200, Peter Lind wrote:
> On 21 April 2010 14:38, Hans =C3=85hlin <ahlin.hans [at] kronan-net.com> wrote=
:
> > Why change the way that has been around for years and adopted by
> > multiple e-mail lists?
> > It feels like it's more problem to change the way for thousands of
> > users just to satisfy a couple of few.
>
> David was venting based on a discussion in another thread. I'm pretty
> sure he knows about the option to reply-all - that's part of the
> reason for venting (it sends multiple emails instead of just the one
> needed). The optimal scenario is to: 1) be able to quickly respond to
> the list, as that's the normal action you want to do and 2) not spam
> people with several emails for no reason (i.e. avoid replying to the
> OP AND the list).

Exactly. I also feel bad for those who have to pay to download per Mb,
GB, etc.

It's pitiful that once I send this E-Mail, Peter and Hans both will get
2 of the exact messages.

--
Blessings,
David M.


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Daniel Egeberg wrote:

> Then get a better email client if yours doesn't support "reply to all"
> or "reply to group". It's hardly the mailing list's fault that your
> client doesn't support that.

Nonsense. I have used lists like this for many, many years. PHP lists
are the only ones I have ever used that behave this way. All the others
I have used are configured that a simple "Reply" replies to the list.

Sure, you can always "Reply All" but then you get multiple replies from
the same person to the same post. Plus, it is really easy to forget.

In my opinion, it is idiotic.

OTOH, what is important to me is the quality of the information that
comes in from you incredibly generous people. Thank you to all posters.
You are the best.

The list behavior is just an irritant, but it pales in comparison to the
benefit.


Ken

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

--=-heff8DATIKzaQxk0j5WJ
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 08:56 -0400, David McGlone wrote:

> On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:42 +0200, Daniel Egeberg wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 14:27, David McGlone <david [at] dmcentral.net> wrote:
> > > I give up. trying to reply to messages on this list is tedious. I can't
> > > pinpoint whether it's because the list is set up to make replies go to
> > > the OP or the OP has his reply-to in his mail client set, or most people
> > > are hitting the reply-to button instead of simply reply.
> >
> > Then get a better email client if yours doesn't support "reply to all"
> > or "reply to group". It's hardly the mailing list's fault that your
> > client doesn't support that.
>
> My email client does support "reply to all", but it's IMHO
> inconsiderate.
>
> Think about people that have to pay for every Mb they download. "reply
> to all" causes these people to have to pay for duplicates.
>
> Now if somebody on this list was paying for their downloads, then you
> and I am costing them money by using "reply to all" and now there are 2
> duplicate messages for them the download.
>
> How would you feel if this was you?
>
> --
> Blessings,
> David M.
>
>


Did you read the link that David Robley sent on the original thread you
made?
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html

What you're proposing would cause a lot of problems for the sake of a
few people. And I hardly think that a few emails are going to cause a
bandwidth issue for anybody. If bandwidth was such an issue, they'd be
using an email client that only downloaded the email headers first, and
from there you could easily discern the duplicate messages.

Thanks,
Ash
http://www.ashleysheridan.co.uk



--=-heff8DATIKzaQxk0j5WJ--

David McGlone wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:49 +0200, Peter Lind wrote:
>> On 21 April 2010 14:38, Hans Åhlin <ahlin.hans [at] kronan-net.com> wrote:
>>> Why change the way that has been around for years and adopted by
>>> multiple e-mail lists?
>>> It feels like it's more problem to change the way for thousands of
>>> users just to satisfy a couple of few.
>> David was venting based on a discussion in another thread. I'm pretty
>> sure he knows about the option to reply-all - that's part of the
>> reason for venting (it sends multiple emails instead of just the one
>> needed). The optimal scenario is to: 1) be able to quickly respond to
>> the list, as that's the normal action you want to do and 2) not spam
>> people with several emails for no reason (i.e. avoid replying to the
>> OP AND the list).
>
> Exactly. I also feel bad for those who have to pay to download per Mb,
> GB, etc.
>
> It's pitiful that once I send this E-Mail, Peter and Hans both will get
> 2 of the exact messages.

I thought you just wanted to know why it is the way it is? Now you're
passing judgement.

Cheers,
Rob.
--
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

On 21 April 2010 14:56, Ashley Sheridan <ash [at] ashleysheridan.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 08:56 -0400, David McGlone wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:42 +0200, Daniel Egeberg wrote:
>> > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 14:27, David McGlone <david [at] dmcentral.net> wrote:
>> > > I give up. trying to reply to messages on this list is tedious. I can't
>> > > pinpoint whether it's because the list is set up to make replies go to
>> > > the OP or the OP has his reply-to in his mail client set, or most people
>> > > are hitting the reply-to button instead of simply reply.
>> >
>> > Then get a better email client if yours doesn't support "reply to all"
>> > or "reply to group". It's hardly the mailing list's fault that your
>> > client doesn't support that.
>>
>> My email client does support "reply to all", but it's IMHO
>> inconsiderate.
>>
>> Think about people that have to pay for every Mb they download. "reply
>> to all" causes these people to have to pay for duplicates.
>>
>> Now if somebody on this list was paying for their downloads, then you
>> and I am costing them money by using "reply to all" and now there are 2
>> duplicate messages for them the download.
>>
>> How would you feel if this was you?
>>
>> --
>> Blessings,
>> David M.
>>
>>
>
>
> Did you read the link that David Robley sent on the original thread you
> made?
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
>
> What you're proposing would cause a lot of problems for the sake of a
> few people. And I hardly think that a few emails are going to cause a
> bandwidth issue for anybody. If bandwidth was such an issue, they'd be
> using an email client that only downloaded the email headers first, and
> from there you could easily discern the duplicate messages.

Except it wouldn't cause a lot of problems, now would it? As you've
heard from quite a few others, many mailing lists work using the
'reply-to' ... and have happy users. Most of the points in the doc you
posted a link to are viewpoints from someone that's used to one thing
and hates the idea of things changing - whether or not it makes life
easier (the "It makes things break" for instance ... calling replying
to the list instead of the OP a "break" is rather farfetched unless
you've stared at something you hate for so long you've become blinded
byt it. Then there's the "Freedom of choice": well, where's my freedom
of choice? I can't use 'reply' as I want to, so it's effectively
reduced *my* freedom).

Quick guess is by now, the majority of people clicking "reply" *mean*
to reply to the list but in effect reply to the OP. Using "reply-to"
would help these people. Anyone using "reply-all" would see no
difference. So when you're advocating that many subscribers should
ditch their email client and install Evolution instead of having *one*
email list have it's settings changed a bit ... I start to wonder if
you've considered things from both sides.

Regards
Peter

--
<hype>
WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fake51
BeWelcome: Fake51
Couchsurfing: Fake51
</hype>

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 13:56 +0100, Ashley Sheridan wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 08:56 -0400, David McGlone wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:42 +0200, Daniel Egeberg wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 14:27, David McGlone <david [at] dmcentral.net> wrote:
> > > > I give up. trying to reply to messages on this list is tedious. I can't
> > > > pinpoint whether it's because the list is set up to make replies go to
> > > > the OP or the OP has his reply-to in his mail client set, or most people
> > > > are hitting the reply-to button instead of simply reply.
> > >
> > > Then get a better email client if yours doesn't support "reply to all"
> > > or "reply to group". It's hardly the mailing list's fault that your
> > > client doesn't support that.
> >
> > My email client does support "reply to all", but it's IMHO
> > inconsiderate.
> >
> > Think about people that have to pay for every Mb they download. "reply
> > to all" causes these people to have to pay for duplicates.
> >
> > Now if somebody on this list was paying for their downloads, then you
> > and I am costing them money by using "reply to all" and now there are 2
> > duplicate messages for them the download.
> >
> > How would you feel if this was you?
> >
> > --
> > Blessings,
> > David M.
> >
> >
>
>
> Did you read the link that David Robley sent on the original thread you
> made?
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html

Yes. but if it was so harmful, why does the 40, 50 or so lists that I've
been on, simply let you hit the reply and it goes back to the list?

I am not arguing or upset, I am just so puzzled as to why the list has
this behavior. It is tedious to have to remember which lists I am on
will accept simply hitting the reply and those that don't.

>
> What you're proposing would cause a lot of problems for the sake of a
> few people.

I'm not proposing anything. Don't get me wrong. It's just so mind
boggling why this behavior. I read and understand the idea behind that
link, but if it was so harmful why is the majority of mailing lists
allowing a simple "reply"?

> And I hardly think that a few emails are going to cause a
> bandwidth issue for anybody. If bandwidth was such an issue, they'd be
> using an email client that only downloaded the email headers first, and
> from there you could easily discern the duplicate messages.

Thats true, I agree. But what about those that are not computer savvy?
Take my wife for instance. LOL

Also, I do not want this discussion to turn into a flame war or anything
of such. I am simply just trying to have a discussion and learn why and
how there is different behavior here, but not anywhere else. And I am
also venting just a tad bit, because for the last 15 years up until I
joined this list 6 months or so ago, I have never seen this issue, and
changing habits after 15 years is quite hard, but I can't change my
habits if I don't figure out how and why.


PS. I used the "reply to list" on this e-mail. Do you know of any way I
can add an icon to my tool bar instead of clicking on the Message menu
or hitting ctrl+l?

--
Blessings,
David M.


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 09:19 -0400, Robert Cummings wrote:
> David McGlone wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:49 +0200, Peter Lind wrote:
> >> On 21 April 2010 14:38, Hans =C3=85hlin <ahlin.hans [at] kronan-net.com> wr=
ote:
> >>> Why change the way that has been around for years and adopted by
> >>> multiple e-mail lists?
> >>> It feels like it's more problem to change the way for thousands of
> >>> users just to satisfy a couple of few.
> >> David was venting based on a discussion in another thread. I'm pretty
> >> sure he knows about the option to reply-all - that's part of the
> >> reason for venting (it sends multiple emails instead of just the one
> >> needed). The optimal scenario is to: 1) be able to quickly respond to
> >> the list, as that's the normal action you want to do and 2) not spam
> >> people with several emails for no reason (i.e. avoid replying to the
> >> OP AND the list).
> >
> > Exactly. I also feel bad for those who have to pay to download per Mb,
> > GB, etc.
> >
> > It's pitiful that once I send this E-Mail, Peter and Hans both will get
> > 2 of the exact messages.
>
> I thought you just wanted to know why it is the way it is? Now you're
> passing judgement.

I'm not passing judgment, It just saddens me that I have to send
multiple messages and this isn't because of anyone, it's because of my
lack of knowledge on how to reply to lists that are set up in this way.
But I think the "reply to list" like ash suggested solves the multiples
problem.

And on a positive note, If I wouldn't have brought this discussion up, I
would have never known. Pretty sure I do now.


--
Blessings,
David M.


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

--001485f85e40d237380484bf5a03
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 9:33 AM, David McGlone <david [at] dmcentral.net> wrote:

> I'm not passing judgment, It just saddens me that I have to send
> multiple messages and this isn't because of anyone, it's because of my
> lack of knowledge on how to reply to lists that are set up in this way.
> But I think the "reply to list" like ash suggested solves the multiples
> problem.
>
> And on a positive note, If I wouldn't have brought this discussion up, I
> would have never known. Pretty sure I do now.
>
>
>

Every couple years this discussion comes up. Cracks me up every time.

When you hit reply all, just take out all the other addresses and leave the
list one in there. The list was setup like this years ago on purpose, and
they've stated in the past they don't want to change it..

--
-Dan Joseph

www.canishosting.com - Unlimited Hosting Plans start [at] $3.95/month. Promo
Code "NEWTHINGS" for 10% off initial order

http://www.facebook.com/canishosting
http://www.facebook.com/originalpoetry

--001485f85e40d237380484bf5a03--

On 21 April 2010 15:41, Dan Joseph <dmjoseph [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> When you hit reply all, just take out all the other addresses and leave t=
he
> list one in there. =C2=A0The list was setup like this years ago on purpos=
e, and
> they've stated in the past they don't want to change it..

And waste time every single time you post to the list ... why do
people become programmers/developers again? To end creating technical
solutions they can then avoid using by doing extra, pointless manual
work?

Anyway, if there's no chance of changing the minds of the people
administering the list, the discussion might as well end now.

--
<hype>
WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fake51
BeWelcome: Fake51
Couchsurfing: Fake51
</hype>

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 09:41, Dan Joseph <dmjoseph [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
> When you hit reply all, just take out all the other addresses and leave t=
he
> list one in there. =A0The list was setup like this years ago on purpose, =
and
> they've stated in the past they don't want to change it..

And we won't, but that doesn't take away from the fact that it
probably does irk a few folks, so this will continue to come up now
and again. As annoying as some may find it, though, it's not
something we're going to change.

--
</Daniel P. Brown>
daniel.brown [at] parasane.net || danbrown [at] php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Looking for hosting or dedicated servers? Ask me how we can fit your budge=
t!

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

--=_samba3-12277-1271858284-0001-2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello David McGlone,

Am 2010-04-21 08:27:18, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> I give up. trying to reply to messages on this list is tedious. I can't
> pinpoint whether it's because the list is set up to make replies go to
> the OP or the OP has his reply-to in his mail client set, or most people
> are hitting the reply-to button instead of simply reply.

You are using Evolution and I am wondering,
why you do not use the "List-Reply Button"!

Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator

--
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ######################
Development of Intranet and Embedded Systems with Debian GNU/Linux

itsystems [at] tdnet France itsystems [at] tdnet UG (haftungsbeschränkt)
Gesch. Michelle Konzack Gesch. Michelle Konzack

Apt. 917 (homeoffice)
50, rue de Soultz Kinzigstraße 17
67100 Strasbourg/France 77694 Kehl/Germany
Tel: +33-6-61925193 mobil Tel: +49-177-9351947 mobil
Tel: +33-9-52705884 fix

<http://www.itsystems.tamay-dogan.net/> <http://www.flexray4linux.org/>
<http://www.debian.tamay-dogan.net/> <http://www.can4linux.org/>

Jabber linux4michelle [at] jabber.ccc.de
ICQ #328449886

Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/

--=_samba3-12277-1271858284-0001-2
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.pgp"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFLzwRqC0FPBMSS+BIRAnRGAKDCnJR+qk5VJPcBE2bQpHmkACCH4gCg 0lB5
AEQNLCGCZypJ4Obzit1SpH8=
=WD8E
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=_samba3-12277-1271858284-0001-2--

Peter Lind wrote:
> On 21 April 2010 15:41, Dan Joseph <dmjoseph [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>> When you hit reply all, just take out all the other addresses and leave the
>> list one in there. The list was setup like this years ago on purpose, and
>> they've stated in the past they don't want to change it..
>
> And waste time every single time you post to the list ... why do
> people become programmers/developers again? To end creating technical
> solutions they can then avoid using by doing extra, pointless manual
> work?

Well most of us have read this thread now... and it kinda burned up
about 4 years worth of time to remove the extraneous addresses :B

Cheers,
Rob.
--
http://www.interjinn.com
Application and Templating Framework for PHP

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 09:41 -0400, Dan Joseph wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 9:33 AM, David McGlone <david [at] dmcentral.net> wrote:
>
> > I'm not passing judgment, It just saddens me that I have to send
> > multiple messages and this isn't because of anyone, it's because of my
> > lack of knowledge on how to reply to lists that are set up in this way.
> > But I think the "reply to list" like ash suggested solves the multiples
> > problem.
> >
> > And on a positive note, If I wouldn't have brought this discussion up, I
> > would have never known. Pretty sure I do now.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Every couple years this discussion comes up. Cracks me up every time.
>
> When you hit reply all, just take out all the other addresses and leave the
> list one in there. The list was setup like this years ago on purpose, and
> they've stated in the past they don't want to change it..
>

I'm the type of person that figures out how and why and then weighs my
options. Figuring out how to reply properly to this list was the first
step, now the next step is figuring out if I can deal with it or not.

I've decided to stay for a couple reasons, for one, everybody on this
list didn't once get mean or hateful during this whole discussion. That
flabbergasted me, because on a lot of lists I am on, quite a few people
on those lists would have instantly jumped down my throat. Secondly,
Everyone on this list that I have seen ask questions and give advise are
darn good programmers, so in order to be in the company of people like
this, then changing my habits shouldn't be hard.

The reason for the subject change was because I feared I was going to
start a flame war, so I was going to back down and just forget I
mentioned it.


--
Blessings,
David M.


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

2010/4/21 David McGlone <david [at] dmcentral.net>:
> On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:49 +0200, Peter Lind wrote:
>> On 21 April 2010 14:38, Hans =C3=85hlin <ahlin.hans [at] kronan-net.com> wrot=
e:
>> > Why change the way that has been around for years and adopted by
>> > multiple e-mail lists?
>> > It feels like it's more problem to change the way for thousands of
>> > users just to satisfy a couple of few.
>>
>> David was venting based on a discussion in another thread. I'm pretty
>> sure he knows about the option to reply-all - that's part of the
>> reason for venting (it sends multiple emails instead of just the one
>> needed). The optimal scenario is to: 1) be able to quickly respond to
>> the list, as that's the normal action you want to do and 2) not spam
>> people with several emails for no reason (i.e. avoid replying to the
>> OP AND the list).
>
> Exactly. I also feel bad for those who have to pay to download per Mb,
> GB, etc.
>
> It's pitiful that once I send this E-Mail, Peter and Hans both will get
> 2 of the exact messages.
>

Strange I only got one, but it ma be a mail server filter

> --
> Blessings,
> David M.
>
>

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

2010/4/21 David McGlone <david [at] dmcentral.net>:
> On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:49 +0200, Peter Lind wrote:
>> On 21 April 2010 14:38, Hans =C3=85hlin <ahlin.hans [at] kronan-net.com> wrot=
e:
>> > Why change the way that has been around for years and adopted by
>> > multiple e-mail lists?
>> > It feels like it's more problem to change the way for thousands of
>> > users just to satisfy a couple of few.
>>
>> David was venting based on a discussion in another thread. I'm pretty
>> sure he knows about the option to reply-all - that's part of the
>> reason for venting (it sends multiple emails instead of just the one
>> needed). The optimal scenario is to: 1) be able to quickly respond to
>> the list, as that's the normal action you want to do and 2) not spam
>> people with several emails for no reason (i.e. avoid replying to the
>> OP AND the list).
>
> Exactly. I also feel bad for those who have to pay to download per Mb,
> GB, etc.
>
> It's pitiful that once I send this E-Mail, Peter and Hans both will get
> 2 of the exact messages.
>

Strange I only got one, but it ma be a mail server filter

> --
> Blessings,
> David M.
>
>

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 16:12 +0200, Hans =C3=85hlin wrote:
> 2010/4/21 David McGlone <david [at] dmcentral.net>:
> > On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:49 +0200, Peter Lind wrote:
> >> On 21 April 2010 14:38, Hans =C3=85hlin <ahlin.hans [at] kronan-net.com> wr=
ote:
> >> > Why change the way that has been around for years and adopted by
> >> > multiple e-mail lists?
> >> > It feels like it's more problem to change the way for thousands of
> >> > users just to satisfy a couple of few.
> >>
> >> David was venting based on a discussion in another thread. I'm pretty
> >> sure he knows about the option to reply-all - that's part of the
> >> reason for venting (it sends multiple emails instead of just the one
> >> needed). The optimal scenario is to: 1) be able to quickly respond to
> >> the list, as that's the normal action you want to do and 2) not spam
> >> people with several emails for no reason (i.e. avoid replying to the
> >> OP AND the list).
> >
> > Exactly. I also feel bad for those who have to pay to download per Mb,
> > GB, etc.
> >
> > It's pitiful that once I send this E-Mail, Peter and Hans both will get
> > 2 of the exact messages.
> >
>
> Strange I only got one, but it ma be a mail server filter

I just received 3 copies of this message. One went to my PHP folder and
2 went to my Inbox.

--
Blessings,
David M.


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

I'm sure that the reason why the this list and a few others are setup =
this way so that if anyone want to reply just to the OP can do so =
without having to figure out or remembering the e-mail address of the =
sender.


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

--0016e6d566695521e50484c01c04
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 21 April 2010 15:41, Dan Joseph <dmjoseph [at] gmail.com> wrote:

> When you hit reply all, just take out all the other addresses and leave the
> list one in there. The list was setup like this years ago on purpose, and
> they've stated in the past they don't want to change it..
>
> --
> -Dan Joseph
>
>
I'd like to refrain from actually passing judgement on this issue--since I
use reply-all by default I could live with both of these settings--but I'm
still curious as to why the list is set up the way it is.

What is the advantage of sending to the OP by default rather than the list?

Michiel

--0016e6d566695521e50484c01c04--

On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 16:12, Hans =C3=85hlin <ahlin.hans [at] kronan-net.com> =
wrote:
> 2010/4/21 David McGlone <david [at] dmcentral.net>:
>> On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 14:49 +0200, Peter Lind wrote:
>>> On 21 April 2010 14:38, Hans =C3=85hlin <ahlin.hans [at] kronan-net.com> wro=
te:
>>> > Why change the way that has been around for years and adopted by
>>> > multiple e-mail lists?
>>> > It feels like it's more problem to change the way for thousands of
>>> > users just to satisfy a couple of few.
>>>
>>> David was venting based on a discussion in another thread. I'm pretty
>>> sure he knows about the option to reply-all - that's part of the
>>> reason for venting (it sends multiple emails instead of just the one
>>> needed). The optimal scenario is to: 1) be able to quickly respond to
>>> the list, as that's the normal action you want to do and 2) not spam
>>> people with several emails for no reason (i.e. avoid replying to the
>>> OP AND the list).
>>
>> Exactly. I also feel bad for those who have to pay to download per Mb,
>> GB, etc.
>>
>> It's pitiful that once I send this E-Mail, Peter and Hans both will get
>> 2 of the exact messages.
>>
>
> Strange I only got one, but it ma be a mail server filter

I'll have to say that I've never received duplicate messages on any of
the nine PHP.net mailing lists I'm subscribed to either.

--
Daniel Egeberg

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 16:32, Tommy Pham <tommyhp2 [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm sure that the reason why the this list and a few others are setup this way so that if anyone want to reply just to the OP can do so without having to figure out or remembering the e-mail address of the sender.

Yes, plus many of the people who send to lists such as php-webmaster [at]
generally do not actually subscribe. Sending a reply privately to
someone can also come in handy if you wish to comment privately on a
commit. Logs/diffs are sent to mailing lists and the From header will
always contain username [at] php.net.

--
Daniel Egeberg

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:20, David McGlone <david [at] dmcentral.net> wrote:
>
> I just received 3 copies of this message. One went to my PHP folder and
> 2 went to my Inbox.

It was sent multiple times. Probably an intentional demonstration
of irony. ;-P

--
</Daniel P. Brown>
daniel.brown [at] parasane.net || danbrown [at] php.net
http://www.parasane.net/ || http://www.pilotpig.net/
Looking for hosting or dedicated servers? Ask me how we can fit your budget!

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

> -----Original Message-----
> From: daniel.egeberg [at] gmail.com [mailto:daniel.egeberg [at] gmail.com] On
> Behalf Of Daniel Egeberg
> Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 7:40 AM
> To: Tommy Pham
> Cc: php-general [at] lists.php.net
> Subject: Re: [PHP] replying to list (I give up)
>

<snip>

I'm using gmail's label which isn't the same as 'move to' filter. I'm =
pretty sure that I didn't receive duplicate. So it might that gmail's =
server has some detection method in place.


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

David McGlone wrote:

> Also, I do not want this discussion to turn into a flame war or
> anything of such. I am simply just trying to have a discussion and
> learn why and how there is different behavior here, but not anywhere
> else.

David, the PHP list behaves like hundreds or thousands of others in thi=
s
respect. Of course there are also lists that work the other way, but
the PHP list is far from alone.



--
Per Jessen, Z=C3=BCrich (17.0=C2=B0C)


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 17:07 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
> David McGlone wrote:
>
> > Also, I do not want this discussion to turn into a flame war or
> > anything of such. I am simply just trying to have a discussion and
> > learn why and how there is different behavior here, but not anywhere
> > else.
>
> David, the PHP list behaves like hundreds or thousands of others in this
> respect. Of course there are also lists that work the other way, but
> the PHP list is far from alone.

It could be just me, but it seems to me this behavior is mostly PHP list
specific. The only other php list I am on is php-db. It doesn't have
this behavior so I guess I'm just not experienced enough to know
otherwise.

--
Blessings,
David M.


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

At 8:27 AM -0400 4/21/10, David McGlone wrote:
>I give up. trying to reply to messages on this list is tedious. I can't
>pinpoint whether it's because the list is set up to make replies go to
>the OP or the OP has his reply-to in his mail client set, or most people
>are hitting the reply-to button instead of simply reply.
>
>It just doesn't make sense to me, why be on the mailing list if it
>hinders having a group discussion without having to jump through
>hurdles. It also defeats the purpose of being on a group list if
>replying sends the reply to the OP.
>
>Every message sent to this list, simply hitting reply should send back
>to this list and not the OP.
>--
>Blessings,
>David M.

David:

Whenever I want to reply to the OP privately, I use their email address.

Whenever I want to reply to all, I use "PHP <php-general [at] lists.php.net>"

I do NOT (usually) use any quick "Reply" or "Reply to All" options in
my email program that sends stuff to everyone. Instead I think about
what I am sending and consider if anyone wants to receive my email.
Sure it's another step, but no more troublesome than trimming my
email to the point or other such considerations to make my replies
"on topic" and more readable.

I'm sorry that you feel that doing so is *so tedious* that you are
going to "give up", but consider the effort that is put forth by
those answering you you should reconsider how much effort you are
willing spend to make this list work. Sometimes things cannot be as
simple as "Click".

Cheers,

tedd
--
-------
http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

David McGlone wrote:

> On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 17:07 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
>> David McGlone wrote:
>>
>> > Also, I do not want this discussion to turn into a flame war or
>> > anything of such. I am simply just trying to have a discussion and=

>> > learn why and how there is different behavior here, but not
>> > anywhere else.
>>
>> David, the PHP list behaves like hundreds or thousands of others in
>> this
>> respect. Of course there are also lists that work the other way, bu=
t
>> the PHP list is far from alone.
>
> It could be just me, but it seems to me this behavior is mostly PHP
> list specific.

Some examples of other lists that behave the same:

ntp-general
linux-kernel
spamassassin-general
rrdtool-users
opensuse-*
nasm-users
isdn4linux
asterisk-users
postfix-users
dovecot-general



--
Per Jessen, Z=C3=BCrich (17.5=C2=B0C)


--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

--=_samba3-23439-1271873388-0001-2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello Peter Lind,

Am 2010-04-21 15:47:54, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> And waste time every single time you post to the list ... why do
> people become programmers/developers again? To end creating technical
> solutions they can then avoid using by doing extra, pointless manual
> work?

Hmmm, being a Programmer/Developer since 1982 and have ever used decent
tools to accomplish a task... including the right MUA which simplify
the Programmers/Developers daily mailing tasks.

> Anyway, if there's no chance of changing the minds of the people
> administering the list, the discussion might as well end now.

Why should Programmers/Developers bother with non-reliable MUAs which
do not support Programmers/Developers daily mailing tasks?

If YOU are a Programmer/Developer why do you bother with a non-suitable
MUA?

Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator

--
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ######################
Development of Intranet and Embedded Systems with Debian GNU/Linux

itsystems [at] tdnet France itsystems [at] tdnet UG (haftungsbeschränkt)
Gesch. Michelle Konzack Gesch. Michelle Konzack

Apt. 917 (homeoffice)
50, rue de Soultz Kinzigstraße 17
67100 Strasbourg/France 77694 Kehl/Germany
Tel: +33-6-61925193 mobil Tel: +49-177-9351947 mobil
Tel: +33-9-52705884 fix

<http://www.itsystems.tamay-dogan.net/> <http://www.flexray4linux.org/>
<http://www.debian.tamay-dogan.net/> <http://www.can4linux.org/>

Jabber linux4michelle [at] jabber.ccc.de
ICQ #328449886

Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/

--=_samba3-23439-1271873388-0001-2
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.pgp"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFLzz9rC0FPBMSS+BIRArj8AJ9eDj1ITbIdRIjgdN+/C29fvOX9ygCa Ax1j
IolM/Er5z8o8v2DlwEM9ex8=
=Yi7U
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=_samba3-23439-1271873388-0001-2--

--=_samba3-5159-1271873633-0001-2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello Michiel Sikma,

Am 2010-04-21 16:35:50, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> I'd like to refrain from actually passing judgement on this issue--since I
> use reply-all by default I could live with both of these settings--but I'm
> still curious as to why the list is set up the way it is.
>
> What is the advantage of sending to the OP by default rather than the lis=
t?

Because DECENT MUA's have three options:

R) Reply to OP
G) Reply to Group
L) Reply to List

If you set Reply-To: to the list, you can not more send PM to the Poster
and you have to edit the message. This is WHY "Reply-To-List" exist.

Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator

--
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ######################
Development of Intranet and Embedded Systems with Debian GNU/Linux

itsystems [at] tdnet France itsystems [at] tdnet UG (haftungsbeschränkt)
Gesch. Michelle Konzack Gesch. Michelle Konzack

Apt. 917 (homeoffice)
50, rue de Soultz Kinzigstraße 17
67100 Strasbourg/France 77694 Kehl/Germany
Tel: +33-6-61925193 mobil Tel: +49-177-9351947 mobil
Tel: +33-9-52705884 fix

<http://www.itsystems.tamay-dogan.net/> <http://www.flexray4linux.org/>
<http://www.debian.tamay-dogan.net/> <http://www.can4linux.org/>

Jabber linux4michelle [at] jabber.ccc.de
ICQ #328449886

Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/

--=_samba3-5159-1271873633-0001-2
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.pgp"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFLz0BgC0FPBMSS+BIRAtwEAJ0ToV7B+0Uw0XdIUyFoMX7vI6Z6KwCc D+lk
OEZY8ZTT1gzbsXssM/CpUMs=
=y2Oe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=_samba3-5159-1271873633-0001-2--

--=_samba3-22282-1271874197-0001-2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello Hans =C5hlin,

Am 2010-04-21 16:12:06, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> Strange I only got one, but it ma be a mail server filter

For me it is only worse, because if someone respond to a message with ME
in the Cc:, the Cc'ed message arrive first and will be trashed because I
have setup a filter which does

# Prevent duplicated messages
:0Whc
|formail -D 8000 .msg_id_cache
:0a
/dev/null

# Kill unwanted CC messages on my cell-phone
:0
* TO_linux4michelle [at] tamay-dogan.net
* ^List-Id:.*php-.*\.lists\.php\.net
/dev/null

:0
* ^List-Post:.*mailto:php-[-a-zA-Z0-9]+ [at]
* ^List-Post:.*mailto:php-\/[-a-zA-Z0-9]+
.ML_php.${MATCH}/



Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator

--
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ######################
Development of Intranet and Embedded Systems with Debian GNU/Linux

itsystems [at] tdnet France itsystems [at] tdnet UG (haftungsbeschränkt)
Gesch. Michelle Konzack Gesch. Michelle Konzack

Apt. 917 (homeoffice)
50, rue de Soultz Kinzigstraße 17
67100 Strasbourg/France 77694 Kehl/Germany
Tel: +33-6-61925193 mobil Tel: +49-177-9351947 mobil
Tel: +33-9-52705884 fix

<http://www.itsystems.tamay-dogan.net/> <http://www.flexray4linux.org/>
<http://www.debian.tamay-dogan.net/> <http://www.can4linux.org/>

Jabber linux4michelle [at] jabber.ccc.de
ICQ #328449886

Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/

--=_samba3-22282-1271874197-0001-2
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.pgp"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFLz0KUC0FPBMSS+BIRAmKmAJ9v7p/FI9Ze0h5rnOxqyyaANR3F2ACf dicd
hu+dW/cmxlhDShvB5nBAXec=
=NpSL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=_samba3-22282-1271874197-0001-2--

--=_samba3-3386-1271875087-0001-2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello David McGlone,

Am 2010-04-21 09:37:48, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> Yes. but if it was so harmful, why does the 40, 50 or so lists that I've
> been on, simply let you hit the reply and it goes back to the list?

Can you tell me which list these are? I assume that on most of those
lists are handicaped Windows-Users which can not do better du to there
cuted down ad restricting software which does not allow Users-Freedom...

Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator

--
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ######################
Development of Intranet and Embedded Systems with Debian GNU/Linux

itsystems [at] tdnet France itsystems [at] tdnet UG (haftungsbeschränkt)
Gesch. Michelle Konzack Gesch. Michelle Konzack

Apt. 917 (homeoffice)
50, rue de Soultz Kinzigstraße 17
67100 Strasbourg/France 77694 Kehl/Germany
Tel: +33-6-61925193 mobil Tel: +49-177-9351947 mobil
Tel: +33-9-52705884 fix

<http://www.itsystems.tamay-dogan.net/> <http://www.flexray4linux.org/>
<http://www.debian.tamay-dogan.net/> <http://www.can4linux.org/>

Jabber linux4michelle [at] jabber.ccc.de
ICQ #328449886

Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/

--=_samba3-3386-1271875087-0001-2
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.pgp"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Digital signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFLz0YNC0FPBMSS+BIRAvoPAJ93Omx48WYX7oW7N1KahS2lys6crACg vtRX
r02zGYK+es4JzSDTj/v6mVE=
=kML6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=_samba3-3386-1271875087-0001-2--

On 21 April 2010 20:09, Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle [at] tamay-dogan.net> w=
rote:
> Hello Peter Lind,

Hi Michelle

> Am 2010-04-21 15:47:54, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
>> And waste time every single time you post to the list ... why do
>> people become programmers/developers again? To end creating technical
>> solutions they can then avoid using by doing extra, pointless manual
>> work?
>
> Hmmm, being a Programmer/Developer since 1982 and have ever used =C2=A0de=
cent
> tools to accomplish a task... =C2=A0including the right =C2=A0MUA =C2=A0w=
hich =C2=A0simplify
> the Programmers/Developers daily mailing tasks.

Making it the problem of the MUA is a hack, not a solution. If you
really want to go down the "I have experience" route I'd expect you to
choose the "fix the problem at the root"-solution not the "lets hack
it by leaving the problem as is and requiring everyone to choose a
proper tool"-hack.

>> Anyway, if there's no chance of changing the minds of the people
>> administering the list, the discussion might as well end now.
>
> Why should Programmers/Developers bother with non-reliable =C2=A0MUAs =C2=
=A0which
> do not support Programmers/Developers daily mailing tasks?
>
> If YOU are a Programmer/Developer why do you bother with a =C2=A0non-suit=
able
> MUA?

Please don't make assumptions about me and my tools - you have no
basis for them. Apart from that, I see no reason to call MUAs
'suitable' based on whether or not they fix a problem that should be
fixed elsewhere.
If I'm not mistaken, we're faced with a quite simple cost/benefit
scenario: how many people want to reply just to the list when
responding and how many people want to reply just to the OP when
responding. If the first number is higher than the second, then we're
imposing extra work on people (either by asking them to manually fix
email addresses or by bullying them into changing email clients) if we
stick to the solution that fit the second group.

But it's still a moot point, as the admins of the list won't be
changing settings.

Regards
Peter

--
<hype>
WWW: http://plphp.dk / http://plind.dk
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/plind
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fake51
BeWelcome: Fake51
Couchsurfing: Fake51
</hype>

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

[snip]tons of stuff[/snip]

C'mon folks! You're programmers! Don't like the way your mail client
handles the list? Then write an interface (using PHP of course) that
only responds to the list when you generate a reply.

--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php