Sometime before sending, David Woodhouse typed (and on Sunday 2012-08-05 sent):
> Your mailer has two reply buttons.
That's an interesting generalisation - it won't apply to everyone.
If I click on a message in the list I get one menu entry for
Reply, leading to four submenu items
* Reply ... (
On 5 August 2012 10:57, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> No. They might not be subscribed to the list.
I think this is the most pertinent point. This is a public list to
which anyone can post, subscribed or not. (See our recent spam message
as proof)
If a non-subscriber posts a question to the list, t
On Sun, 2012-08-05 at 10:18 +0100, Colin Law wrote:
> But would they not always see it via the list?
No. They might not be subscribed to the list. Or they might be
subscribed, and filter it into a folder they never look at. Read the URL
I gave.
You can almost never be sure that they'll see the m
On 2012/08/05 10:18, Colin Law wrote:
> On 5 August 2012 10:10, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > On Sat, 2012-08-04 at 12:14 +0100, Derek Moss wrote:
> >> OK thanks, I'll do that then. I just thought it would be annoying for
> >> the sender to receive the message via the list and directly.
> >
> > It mi
On Fri, 2012-08-03 at 13:38 -0400, Derek J. Balling wrote:
> The "logic" behind the default is that the mail is technically from
> "Joe" and if you reply, there's a CHANCE you want to just reply to
> joe, and might be including information private for joe's eyes.
That's an interesting way of phras
On 5 August 2012 10:10, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-08-04 at 12:14 +0100, Derek Moss wrote:
>> OK thanks, I'll do that then. I just thought it would be annoying for
>> the sender to receive the message via the list and directly.
>
> It might be slightly annoying to some people who receiv
On Sat, 2012-08-04 at 12:14 +0100, Derek Moss wrote:
> OK thanks, I'll do that then. I just thought it would be annoying for
> the sender to receive the message via the list and directly.
It might be slightly annoying to some people who receive two copies of
the email. But it could be much *more*
On 03/08/12 18:38, Derek J. Balling wrote:
There's simply two schools of thought when it comes to mailing lists.
1.) Reply-To header should be included, set to the mailing list address
2.) No Reply-To header, mail is sent to the original sender
mailman defaults, I believe, to the latter. You c
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/06/thunderbird_dead/
^ describes the situation. "Postbox" is a good alternative, albeit not free
($10)
___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_ipl
On 04/08/12 13:00, dinkypumpkin wrote:
Clive wrote:
On 03/08/12 19:56, dinkypumpkin wrote:
... Thunderbird (RIP)
?RIP - I am using it on Windows and Linux and still appear to be getting
updates. What do you know that I don't :-( It's loss would be a shame.
Sorry - didn't mean to alarm you
On 04/08/12 11:56, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2012/08/04 11:37, Clive wrote:
On 03/08/12 19:56, dinkypumpkin wrote:
... Thunderbird (RIP)
?RIP - I am using it on Windows and Linux and still appear to be
getting updates. What do you know that I don't :-( It's loss would be
a shame.
https://b
Clive wrote:
On 03/08/12 19:56, dinkypumpkin wrote:
... Thunderbird (RIP)
?RIP - I am using it on Windows and Linux and still appear to be getting
updates. What do you know that I don't :-( It's loss would be a shame.
Sorry - didn't mean to alarm you. Tongue was slightly in cheek there,
bu
On 3 August 2012 21:24, Colin Law wrote:
> On 3 August 2012 20:37, David Woodhouse wrote:
>> On Fri, 2012-08-03 at 19:40 +0100, Derek Moss wrote:
>>>
>>> At the moment users have to cut and paste the list address from the CC
>>> field every time they want to reply to the list (using Reply All) an
On 2012/08/04 11:37, Clive wrote:
> On 03/08/12 19:56, dinkypumpkin wrote:
> >... Thunderbird (RIP)
> >
> ?RIP - I am using it on Windows and Linux and still appear to be
> getting updates. What do you know that I don't :-( It's loss would be
> a shame.
https://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2012/07/06/t
On 03/08/12 19:56, dinkypumpkin wrote:
... Thunderbird (RIP)
?RIP - I am using it on Windows and Linux and still appear to be getting
updates. What do you know that I don't :-( It's loss would be a shame.
___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lis
On 3 August 2012 20:37, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-08-03 at 19:40 +0100, Derek Moss wrote:
>>
>> At the moment users have to cut and paste the list address from the CC
>> field every time they want to reply to the list (using Reply All) and
>> that does seem stupid and bound to lead to
On 03/08/2012 19:56, dinkypumpkin wrote:
> Thunderbird (RIP)
Why RIP?
Reports of Thunderbird's death are exaggerated.
--
mb
___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/get_iplayer
On Fri, 2012-08-03 at 19:40 +0100, Derek Moss wrote:
>
> At the moment users have to cut and paste the list address from the CC
> field every time they want to reply to the list (using Reply All) and
> that does seem stupid and bound to lead to messages accidentally being
> sent privately instead
On 03/08/12 19:56, dinkypumpkin wrote:
Thunderbird (RIP) and some other clients do it
Yep
Gmail can be managed via TB too
I only use TB for ML's
___
get_iplayer mailing list
get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo
Derek Moss wrote:
As I said, I do have both Reply and Reply Alln in gmail but as with
any e-mail program it's not marked "Private Reply" and it's natural
that users would expect Reply to send the message to the list.
Also spread a little blame towards GMail and makers of email software.
Mailma
On 3 August 2012 18:28, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-08-03 at 17:59 +0100, Derek Moss wrote:
>> When I reply to a message it always puts the e-mail of the sender
>> rather than the list in the To field. The only way round this I've
>> found so far is to click Reply All and then cut
>> get
On Aug 3, 2012, at 12:59 PM, Derek Moss wrote:
> When I reply to a message it always puts the e-mail of the sender
> rather than the list in the To field. The only way round this I've
> found so far is to click Reply All and then cut
> get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org from the CC field and paste
On Fri, 2012-08-03 at 17:59 +0100, Derek Moss wrote:
> When I reply to a message it always puts the e-mail of the sender
> rather than the list in the To field. The only way round this I've
> found so far is to click Reply All and then cut
> get_iplayer@lists.infradead.org from the CC field and pas
23 matches
Mail list logo
