Re: Eternal problems responding to posts.

Harold Driscoll (HD):
> > If you want to replay to all, then use your mail program's REPLY ALL option.

Ken Sherwood (KS):
>SURE. Then, *2* copies go to the person to whom I'm responding ... one to the
>sender, and one to the list.
>That's NOT what I want to do; nor, especially, do I want it happening to me.

I'm sorry you don't.  You could set your own reply-to when sending
to the HWG's lists; as you have not generated a reply-to on your
own, you are left with the default action.  (The HWG's list will not
alter your own reply-to setting; it will be passed along without
munging.  For example, if you really did want replies to go to the
list, you could configure your software to set the reply-to header
in that manner.)

There are many cases in which a reply to both the list and the 
sender are appropriate -- for example, if someone is on a list in
digest form, and would like an answer before the evening's digest
is issued.

The current setup allows for that to occur.

HD wrote:
> > The consequence is that the lists see relatively little of the ~noise~
> > postings that clutter up most lists, things that belong via private email.

KS:
>Well your response sounds to me to be indicative of an attitude that says,
>"Hey, if they're too stupid to realize that this email list doesn't work the
>same way as at least 90% of the other email lists out there work, then, heck, we
>don't wanna be reading their posts anyway!"

You read too much into Harold's reply.  In fact, as someone who knows
Harold well enough to have argued with him many times in the past, I
think you're being quite uncharitable towards him.  He gave you a
reasonable answer; if it doesn't accord with your personal worldview
of how lists "should" operate, I'm sorry to hear that, but he was
accurate and rather polite.

Why are you posting with such *hurtful* intent, Ken?

KS:
>Please correct my if my impression is incorrect. All I know is, outta 15 lists
>that I respond to frequently, plus many many personal emails, the *only* time I
>have to do other than hit my "reply" key combo is with HWG.

Anecdotal evidence is often deceptive, and rarely proves anything.
For example, I'm on a number of mailing lists that do exactly what
the Guild does -- such as the W3C's discussion and working group
lists.  All of them are configured as the Guild's lists are 
configured, not the way your lists are configured.

Believe it or not, the Guild's lists are configured in the most
flexible and standardized manner.  The other lists you may be used
to using could very well be configured poorly.  Because you are
used to it, you may not recognize the problem.

>Bottom line, this feels to be a pain where it hurts.

I'm sorry you feel pain.  This could explain your *hurtful* posts,
as you lash out against something that you just can't understand.

You may want to consider subscribing to the digest versions of
the Guild's lists.  On all of those, the reply-to is set to the
list, as there is not one individual poster.  That might solve
your problem?

Have a :) day,

--K

-- 
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