[nama] Re: (admin) Replies to sender vs. replies to list
- From: Joel Roth <joelz@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: nama@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 08:43:32 -1000
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 02:16:40PM -0400, S. Massy wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 01:54:39PM -1000, Joel Roth wrote:
> > Hi Namites and Namacologists,
> >
> > Currently replies default to the list.
> > I'm considering changing that to reply to sender,
> > to avoid private mails unintentially going to the list.
> No objection. When I restarted using mailing lists extensively a few
> years ago, I found it very irksome, since I had grown accustomed to a
> simple reply going to the whole list (which was the standard ca.
> 2000-2003), but I'm used to it by now and I can see that it has its
> uses. Besides, it makes sense to fall in with what seems to be the
> modern standard.
Mostly there is no standardization, at least on the lists I
follow.
I thought that default reply to the list was a recent
innovation.
With mutt, my preferred mail reader, L triggers a reply to
the list, R a reply to the sender.
> Cheers,
> S.M.
>
--
Joel Roth
Other related posts:
