Re: [Evolution] Default change in 1.5?

On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 10:41, Rick DeNatale wrote:
On Thu, 2004-04-01 at 10:28 +0200, Tony Earnshaw wrote:

OT rant: Anybody but anybody who replies /both/ to me and the list, be
it reply/cc or cc/reply, immediately gets deleted from my inbox without
me reading his message. That includes Ximian notables, Openldap
notables, Postfix notables, whoever. I obviously read the lists I
subscribe to and answer there. Obviously the above doesn't include
private mail :)

I've never understood that practise either. I think it's even worse than
one of my all time pet peeves, the folks who forward you e-mail without
bothering to notice that you were already on the copy list.

[Warning: vague, ramble down memory lane]

Think back, way back... to the days of ASCII email (ahhhh) and text
everything (when there really was a reason to live inside of Emacs to
get a windowing system on a VAX).... It was fairly common practise to
direct email cc folks you were replying to as it often got there way
faster than via the mailing list (back in the days of modem connections
on the "backbone"). Plus you might want to start a side discussion with
the person. Of course, it was also standard practise to indicate that
you had via a [replied to list and cc'ed] disclaimer at the top of your

Fast forward to the present, with GUI everything, and horrible, nasty
broken shitty mailers that insert your reply at the top, and copy
everything, with lots of posters without a clue and no means test to get
on the net and you have the current anarchy. Actually the Evo list is a
very high signal list with mostly clued in participants. The requirement
to subscribe to be able to participate is a very good one, and this
alone is a good reason to keep it a list rather than a newsgroup. 

Strange how there seems to be a strong correlation between with the
proportion of Unix/Linus users to Windows on the lists I subscribe to,
and the quality of the list. And, don't even think about going to open
newsgroups... closed mailing lists are the last bastion of reasonable
signal/noise ratios.


Brad Warkentin <brad warkentin rogers com>

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]