[talk-au] mailing lists and replying to them.

[Roy Wallace]

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 12:47 PM, John Smith<delta_foxtrot at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- On Thu, 6/8/09, Sam Couter <sam at couter.id.au> wrote:
>
>> I understand but will never accept the opposing position as
>> I use a mail
>> client that does handle reply-to-list correctly and have no
>> sympathy for
>> people who choose to use poor quality software when better
>> alternatives
>> exist.

+1

> As I said, there is relatively few software options that handle this correctly, and none of the popular ones do.

Um... Gmail works perfectly. I'd call it popular.

> Oh and yahoo mail filters keep catching emails as spam because I can only imagine it's mail coming from myself to myself, but it's also tripping up on others because the from address doesn't match allow hosts that email can be sent from a domain.

Erm... can't say I've used yahoo mail but its spam filters should be
smarter than that. Don't forget to say it's "Not Spam" - you should be
able to teach it.

> So while you can be up on your high horse the rest of us prefer to be practical and just get on with it.

Um... if you post to a mailing list you should be expecting others to
give their opinion, which appears to be all that Sam was doing.

> Apart from Sam does anyone else have an issue with the list reply-to field being set to the mailing list, not having it always confuses new people, and I really can't be bothered typing in the address all the time so I always hit reply to all, which probably generates twice the email needed.

I also hit "Reply to all" (the "a" button in Gmail). I don't see a
problem with it. And I wouldn't worry about sending a double copy of a
plain text email - the Internet is all grown up now, it can handle it.
And as you yourself said, "a lot of apps/mail server software filter
duplicates so it's not as big of a problem as it once was".  And I
disagree about it "confusing new people". "Reply to all" seems fairly
self-explanatory to me - it means "reply to all".