Re: [Evolution] Bounce/remail command

[Jamie Zawinski <jwz jwz org>]

Jeffrey P. Lanza wrote:
> I'll admit that everything you've said here is true, but it doesn't change
> the fact that there are some situations in which one needs and wants a
> resend command. 

I disagree.

> I use resend all the time to make transfers from one mail
> account to another and I'm sure that others do the same.

You could just as easily multi-select the messages you want to move,
forward them, and then use "explode" on the receiving end.  I used to do
that all the time when I was in such situations in the past.

> If you're that fearful of people abusing the command, keep it hidden
> unless explicitly enabled.

I do not believe in the customizability cop-out.  

I don't care what obscure, random, expert-user commands are buried in
the program in a not-discoverable-to-normal-real-world-users way.
Implement what you like; build in elisp and let people write their own
commands -- whatever.

I'm talking about how the program behaves out of the box.  

If the program is not usable without turning on some preference or
secret feature, then the program is buggy: if that happens, then that
feature was actually needed, not just a bone thrown to the guru users.

So talking about "expert mode" is completely uninteresting to me.
If it makes you feel better to imagine a "resend" command the can only
be enabled by editing some text file (that is, not in a preferences
dialog, and not on a menu) then fine, we can stop talking about it,
because in my opinion, such a command isn't even a part of the program
at that point.

However, if everybody's going to be turning on that command anyway,
because the other commands are insufficient, then something's gone wrong
with the design of the program.

I do not want to be a recipient of "resend" messages.  I believe that
every time I've gotten a "resend" message from some third party, it
really should have been a "forward" message.  I want to see the UI
designed such that people are led to using "forward" because that's the
right thing.

If you don't believe that, then we've got more arguing to do.

> Wow!  I can't even begin to express how much I disagree with you here.
> Mail readers that "help" people to do the right thing are terrible! 

Uh, helping people do the right thing is the ENTIRE POINT of user
interface design.  What the hell else do you think it's for?

> That sounds like Microsoft rhetoric to me.  I know what the right
> thing to do is and if I fail to do it, then I should be flamed
> mercilessly for it.  I think it *is* the job of every person who
> corresponds with C to correct his behavior.  Proper etiquette should
> be passed on by conditioning, not because one's mail reader won't let
> one make mistakes.

Passing etiquette on by conditioning does not work.  Please take my word
for this, as someone who has written a mail reader used by upwards of
ten million newbies.  It.  Does.  Not. Work.  The *proper* things have
to be the *easy* and *obvious* things.  If you don't understand that,
you've got no business doing UI design -- go back to the command line.

-- 
Jamie Zawinski
jwz jwz org             http://www.jwz.org/
jwz dnalounge com       http://www.dnalounge.com/