Re: Eternal problems responding to posts.

At 04:01 PM 12/2/1999 , unique wrote:
>This is not intended to be a flame post; please do not dismiss it as such.

No, it's just an idiot post.

>What *does* concern me is that, when I am reading an HWG email that is currently
>in my inbox, I CANNOT reply *simply* by typing my typical command/control-key
>combo for "reply".

I'm sorry that your software doesn't do what you want it to do.

>If I attempt to do so, my "reply" is addressed ONLY to the writer of the
>original email, and NOT to the list in general.

Yes, that's by design.

>YEESH!!!!!!!
>ALL of HWG's lists that I'm on work in the same way.

Yes, that's by design.

>Can someone please offer some intelligent commentary regarding this apparently
>"archaic" feature of the way HWG's email lists are set up?

It's not archaic.  We're simply not munging the message headers.
This is appropriate behavior for mailing lists and is in compliance
with the RFCs.  Have you checked those?

>Goodness gracious, the supposedly "premier" HTML organization "should" have
>better mastery over "user friendliness" than it apparently does.

Uh, we have perfectly fine mastery.  We're following the RFCs.  You
should configure your software to "reply to all" if that's what you
want it to do.  Otherwise, replying to the original poster is 
correct and expected behavior.

>BTW, I believe I remember that HWG's policies regarding "crossposting" forbid
>excessive use of the crossposting feature.

So, you know you're doing something wrong, and you did it anyway?

You COULD just write to the list guides to ask.  That's what they're
there for.

>However, I truly believe that my crossposting of this post to ALL of the HWG
>lists to which I subscribe (only 4, *small*) is NOT, *in essence*, a violation
>of the principles involved.

Sure it is.  There's a reason for rules.  This one, for example, 
prevents excessive fragmentation and redundant posts to multiple
lists.

>The only reason I've "crossposted" this email is to save myself 5-10 minutes of
>unnecessary clerical activities.

Yes, that's the reason most people do it.  They would rather save
their own 5-10 minutes (do you REALLY have a decent email program
if it would take you an extra 3 minutes per message to resend 
something), while wasting 5-10 minutes of 5,000 people around the
world.  (Assume 2,000 members per list on 4 lists, with some overlap;
5K is a good ballpark figure.)

>Thank you, whoever you are, for your consideration of all that I've stated here!

Gosh, you're welcome.

I'm only replying to this on the -theory list, since that's where I
received this message first, and since one could always attempt to
argue that the theory of list header munging is appropriate.  (It's
not really, though.)

-- 
Kynn Bartlett                                    mailto:kynn(at)hwg.org
President, HTML Writers Guild                    http://www.hwg.org/
AWARE Center Director                          http://aware.hwg.org/

HWG hwg-theory mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA