Flogging a dead horse here.
On 7/19/2013 10:58 AM, Aahz Maruch wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013, Mark Roberts wrote:
Aahz Maruch wrote:
On Fri, Jul 19, 2013, Mark Roberts wrote:
Every email list I've ever been on has had reply-to-list as the
default. Why would you participate in a mailing list and not want
replies sent to the... list? Makes no sense.
Interesting -- even before the various lists I've been started changing
their policies around a decade ago, I'd say that at least half the lists
I've been on were not reply-to list. As for why, aside from the issue
about boo-boos with intended private messages, it's a way to control list
volume. Another reason is that some mailing lists have restricted access
and anyone not on the list participating in the conversation needs to be
cc'd, and the Reply-To header mucks with that.
I can see how one might accidentally slip and send a private message
to the list - been there, done that - but if I compare the ratio of
private emails to public (entire list) emails I've sent in reply to
PDML messages it's well over 100:1.
That's almost certainly true for me for all mailing lists I've been on.
But the point is that the cost of sending a private e-mail public is
also much higher, and I've seen a lot of mildly embarrassing, some
moderately embarrasing, and a few outright damaging (e.g. disclosing
major secrets). I don't think it's 100:1 in that direction, but I also
don't think it's a slam dunk that the cost/benefit analysis is totally
oriented toward reply-to list on this one ground.
(I do realize, of course, that reply-to sender doesn't completely prevent
stupid disclosure of private/secret info, one only needs to look at
damnyouautocorrect.com to prove otherwise.)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
