From: Michael B. <Michael.Bender@Sun.COM> - 2006-11-02 21:14:08
|
Del Merritt wrote: > Michael Bender wrote: > >> I'd sure like Reply-To: to be set to the list [...] > > Not for me, thanks. I like that when I hit "Reply" it goes to the > "original sender" and that "Reply All" does what _it_ says. The times - > recent, in fact - that I've had to mung the "To:" on a response to a > list that has specified "Reply-To:" are more tedious to me than having > to look for my as-big-as-the-Reply "Reply All" button. The reason that I like Reply-To: to go to the list rather than the individual is because I feel that participating in a list is like being in a group of people where we're all participating in the same conversation. It's not very often that I will take someone aside in a group and say something to them privately and then re-join the group. I guess that this is really more a matter of how we view list/group communication styles rather than a right vs. wrong thing. > As to which mailer does what, Thunderbird makes it clear - by including > the "Reply-to:" header in the normally-displayed headers - what Reply > will do. But it's no less tedious when I want to make a private reply. In the case of this list, doing a Reply-All does the right thing in that it replies to both the original sender and to the list. I am on some lists where Reply and Reply-All go to the list, and I have to manually copy/paste the original poster's e-mail address if I want to do a private reply. So, in this case, the Reply stuff isn't an onerous as it could be. > This is a preference thing. Yes, I agree. mike -- Mic...@su... Sun Ray Product Engineering I don't speak for my employer. My opinions are not necessarily those of Sun Microsystems, Inc. or any of its wholly-owned subsidiaries. |