From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 13 22:55:04 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF62E16A4CE for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 22:55:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from makeworld.com (makeworld.com [198.92.228.38]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CF7A43D39 for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 22:55:04 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from racerx@makeworld.com) Received: from localhost (localhost.com [127.0.0.1]) by makeworld.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B960D6121 for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 16:55:03 -0600 (CST) Received: from makeworld.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (makeworld.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 36740-01 for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 16:55:00 -0600 (CST) Received: from [198.92.228.34] (racerx.makeworld.com [198.92.228.34]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by makeworld.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A74F6123 for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 16:55:00 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <420FDAD9.7080801@makeworld.com> Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 16:55:21 -0600 From: Chris User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050101) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org References: <420FCA6C.7070604@makeworld.com> <1987008862.20050213232914@wanadoo.fr> <420FD773.5070400@makeworld.com> <610591028.20050213235206@wanadoo.fr> In-Reply-To: <610591028.20050213235206@wanadoo.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by ClamAV 0.75.1/amavisd-new-2.2.1 (20041222) at makeworld.com - Isn't it ironic Subject: Re: An observation X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 22:55:04 -0000 Anthony Atkielski wrote: > Chris writes: > > >>Ahh - so the mentality behind it is simply this; >>You get tired of doing the right thing, so you do the wrong thing and >>force everyone else that follows the rules, do all the cutting. > > > No. The behavior this produces is the correct behavior for a mailing > list. > > Normally, someone posts a first message to a mailing list, and then > people who reply to that message send replies that are also routed to > the list, so that all on the list can share the contents of the replies > (that is, after all, why it's a list). If someone asks a question, for > example, it makes little sense for all replies to the question to go > privately to the person asking it, since many other people may have the > same question. Logically all replies are sent to the list, so that > everyone can see them. > > The fact that virtually everyone on these lists is doing exactly this > demonstrates that it is indeed "correct" for these lists. However, many > of them are doing it with "reply all" or by manually changing the > destination address of their replies, which is labor-intensive and > generates an extra, useless copy of the reply in the case of "reply > all." I've simply automated a solution to this in my own e-mail > configuration so that I don't have to alter every single message in > order to route it correctly. > > I hope this clarifies things. > > >>Yes - I am guilty as charged (this time) however, you continually do it. >>There IS a difference. > > > The biggest difference is that you spend most of your bandwidth > attacking me, instead of discussing the nominal topics of the threads > here. You'll notice that I do not reciprocate, nor do I complain. > I will allow you to have the last word. Only because others have posted the errors of your ways - Even a post as to where the charters are. -- Best regards, Chris A consultant is an ordinary person a long way from home.