On Sun, 12 Sep 1999, Tim Spofford wrote:
> It's only a problem for me when the list owner asks us to do something
> that's inconsistent with the way the listserv is configured. I've been on
> here a couple of years and haven't said a word about it until now. I've
> been moderating or maintaining lists or list-like discussions since 1988
> (one list now, 4 or 5 fidonet echos in the past) and between work and home
> I subscribe to six lists currently. I've never before encountered one
> that worked this way.
I understand where you're coming from. It would really be easier if it
used a "reply to" of the list address, but I just remember to reply to
all, and that takes care of it for me (except for the 2 answers to the
originator). I subcribe to a list (Towertalk, a ham radio list about
towers and antennas) that is set up the same way, except that it will not
allow a cc: to be posted. That REALLY makes it hard to reply to the list,
so it can be worse!
> I'm done. I raised the issue. I don't care if it's changed or not. I'll
> keep doing what I've been doing which, in most cases and unintentionally,
> results in my replies going to the sender of the original and not to the
> list. Clearly it's not a problem for others so I'm not going to let it be
> for me.
I'm hoping that the list members agree that the originator getting two
copies of a reply is not a big deal. If it really is, I guess I'll
probably end up replying to the originator only too, it ain't easy to cut
and paste in a unix shell.
Rich Gort
WWP19 #202 SAYOKO
Lake Stevens, WA