David Champion wrote: > On 2001.11.02, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > "Will Yardley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 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. no that's true (and that's partially) why i mentioned the possiblity of them stating one preference or another in the reply. > > 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. fair enough. most of the lists that i'm on are closed to outside posters, so unless someone has specifically requested a cc i usually reply to the list (especially since some people _really_ don't like it if you respond to them). i've found that most people feel this way on mailing lists that are also gateways to newsgroups.... > > 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. yuppers. i actually didn't realize that group-reply honored 'mail-followup-to' - knowing that probably would have changed my answer a bit. i guess i assumed that group-reply would blindly reply to all (except yourself if you have metoo unset). doing 'group-reply' can start to get ugly when a lot of people are cc'd.... i don't care too much when people cc me, since i have different addresses for each list, and filter mail sent to those addresses to the appropriate folders anyway... plus i use procmail to eliminate duplicates based on message-id. i still generally prefer to just receive a list-reply though. speaking of this, is there any way to have a macro that does (in essence).... if (there is a valid list), ask me if i want to list reply if i hit 'reply' instead of 'list-reply' this way if i accidentally hit 'r' instead of 'L' it'll make sure i actually mean to do that. actually at this point, i'm so used to hitting 'l' instead of 'r' that i sometimes try to list-reply to my friends :> w -- GPG Public Key: http://infinitejazz.net/will/pgp/
