|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:31:45PM -0400, Dave Turner wrote:
> Bill Jonas wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 04:44:05PM -0400, Dave Turner wrote:
> > > I like it, actually. Mostly, I've just been trained that reply goes to
> > > the list - and it is, in my experience, the most common case.
> >
> > http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
> >
> > Just today, I found out about Mutt's ignore_list_reply_to setting, which I
> > immediately set. God bless America.
> >
> > --
> > Bill Jonas * bill@billjonas.com * http://www.billjonas.com/
>
> I've read it before, and I disagree strongly. Briefly:
> Minimal munging assumes that list admins are idiots.
> This feature does add something: convinience - it optimizes for the
> common case.
> It doesn't break things - you have your ignore_list_reply_to, so nothing
> is broken.
> It doesn't actually remove choices.
You're wrong. It throws away information.
It seems very un-American to me that a list admin would mandate what
the `common case' is.
Gratuitous munging is wrong. If you don't understand that, you don't
understand the Internet, and you don't understand RFC822. I'm usually
a polite guy, but this is crap. If you don't know that munging is wrong,
then you don't know what you're talking about. Stop opining.
And you misspelled `convenience'. :^P
- Kurt
**Majordomo list services provided by PANIX <URL:http://www.panix.com>**
**To Unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe phl" to majordomo@lists.pm.org**
|
|