* Derek Martin <inva...@pizzashack.org> [02-27-13 13:56]: > On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 08:00:24AM -0500, Patrick Shanahan wrote: [...] > > Responding to "list" mail *should* be to the "list" unless op has > > *specifically* requested direct mail. All other action is illogical > > and inefficient. > > Here's where I disagree. There have been many, many times when I > wanted to send a private reply to a mailing list post. Usually it's > because I have a remark that's not related to the post, per se. > Neither the mailing list software, nor my client software, should get > in the way of me replying however I damn well feel like replying.
And in my previous post I failed to address your statement correctly. I know you have control of your mail reading client, mutt, and can address mail as you choose. And this is how it *should* be. But "list" mail is still a public thing and *private* mail is *private*. I see no reason to send the *same* mail both to the list and the OP, unless he has requested separate copy. -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA HOG # US1244711 http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://linuxcounter.net
