[OS X TeX] Lobbying for Reply-To as it used to be
Michael S. Hanson
mshanson at wesleyan.edu
Mon Mar 22 18:56:41 CET 2004
On Mar 22, 2004, at 10:32 AM, Stefan Kauhaus wrote:
> * PRO fixed Reply-To-Header:
> I'm lazy. I just want to click once and it should work as I want it to.
That's one, um,... _opinion_ of why the original specification of the
reply-to-header is preferable.
A more compelling one (in my opinion) is that the small cost of
inadvertently replying to the list as a whole (or having to take the
extra effort -- depending on how "lazy" one is -- to copy and paste the
OP's address into the To: field) is significantly outweighed by the
potential loss of useful information that will not go to the list as a
whole but only to individuals. This is certainly bad for people who
mostly lurk or later search the archives for solutions. (Might it also
increase the volume of RTFM questions?)
The ongoing discussion seems to suggest that information already is
being lost to the list. Some long-time list members report difficulty
with the new approach; newer members may not be aware of the
distinction; causal users might not even know that Cmd-Shift-R is an
option. In any case, given the positive public externalities of the
old system, I'd vote for return to it, if that is what we are doing
with this discussion. The new one just seems inconsistent with the
value this list has had to date.
My $0.02, which is worth much less in Europe of late.... ;)
On Mar 22, 2004, at 11:58 AM, Will Robertson wrote:
> My complaint is that when you want to reply, by default you end up
> sending a private email to the person, who will then also receive the
> mailing list version---two copies of the same email?
Geez, Will -- can't you just hit delete?! How "lazy" can you be??
Please see <http://www.esm.psu.edu/mac-tex/> for list
guidelines, information, and LaTeX/TeX resources.
More information about the macostex-archives