On 2001.11.02, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Will Yardley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hit whatever key you have bound to <group-reply> (i think g by > default?)... however you should generally avoid doing this. if people > want to be cc'd or replied to privately, they will probably have > 'set-followup-to' or 'reply-to' set to their address.
I don't find that to be true. Many people are aware that they can do that, and they do, but many more (in my experience) do not. Rather, they just say in the text of their message that they'd like private replies or carbon copies. > it's generally considered rude to send to both a list and to someone on > the list, so you should only do this if the person has specifically > indicated that they want to receive a cc. I don't think that's *generally* considered rude, either. I consider it an aspect of using e-mail in the contemporary environment. I suspect that most people expect this behavior. > with other mutt users at least (are there any other MUAs that set > 'mail-followup-to' correctly??) if they're not 'subscribed' to a mailing > list, their 'mail-followup-to' will probably include both their address > and the list address, so <list-reply> will cc them automatically. This is the thing you can count on. I always group-reply in lists that I know have an open posting policy, because I cannot assume that the sender is on a list, and because there is a way (m-f-t) to indicate that you don't want a copy, and because my mailer respects that. YMMV! -- -D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] NSIT University of Chicago
