On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 07:54 +1100, Ben Schmidt wrote:
>
> Hey! I like lists without Reply-To set. I don't think they're braindead,
We need to agree to disagree Ben :)
> However, your point is valid. If you *really* want to keep all
> discussion public for a list, Reply-To is a way to achieve
On Mon, 2014-01-20 at 17:25 -0500, Charles Marcus wrote:
>
> Personally, I don't like that preference because I would much rather get
> the LIST post than the direct one.
>
also, some list software can be configured that if it sees a direct
copy, it wont send them the list copy, mailman has
On 2014-01-20 3:25 PM, Ben Schmidt wrote:
Are you referring to the claim that mailing list managers filter out
recipients who have been given a direct copy? Can you refer me to an MLM
that actually does this, with some definite proof that it does? Because
I've heard rumours that they do this, bu
Dont quite get you there, but its pretty simple,
we are on a list, having an open discussion, if you reply to me, or I,
you, then it should go by the list, on this list very simple, its
configured correctly by having reply-to set, to the list, problem does
not exist, if you reply, or reply-all, at
The vast majority of MUA software on the planet has only Reply and
Reply All. Those users are using Reply All, so as to keep it a group
discussion.
"Reply All" has a standard, decades old behavior, and mailing list
robots are designed around the assumption that it is used.
Email, and certainly
On 18.01.2014 05:58, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2014-01-17 10:10 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
Your vehemence against private replies is bizarre and baffling.
Surprisingly, I'm in agreement with Noel (I generally don't see his
posts unless someone quotes him)...
What you seem to fail to be grasping i
On 2014-01-17 10:10 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
Your vehemence against private replies is bizarre and baffling.
Surprisingly, I'm in agreement with Noel (I generally don't see his
posts unless someone quotes him)...
What you seem to fail to be grasping is, we are saying that on PUBLIC
DISCUSSIO
On 17.01.2014 16:25, Noel Butler wrote:
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 18:58 +0100, Benny Pedersen wrote:
Charles Marcus skrev den 2014-01-16 20:27:
On 2014-01-15 1:54 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
thunderbird need a plugin to make it work, roundcube it just works
default
Thunderbird has had a proper
Noel Butler skrev den 2014-01-18 01:25:
Y O U are on a P U B L I C discussion list,
and ?
___
Roundcube Users mailing list
users@lists.roundcube.net
http://lists.roundcube.net/mailman/listinfo/users
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 11:12 -0800, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>
> Indeed, Reindl did not reply to the list, as claimed; or at least so I'm
> led to suspect, based on not having received the post you're replying
> to, keeping in mind that absence of evidence doesn't proves absence.
Harald is current
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 18:58 +0100, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> Charles Marcus skrev den 2014-01-16 20:27:
> > On 2014-01-15 1:54 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> >> thunderbird need a plugin to make it work, roundcube it just works
> >> default
> >
> > Thunderbird has had a proper 'Reply-To-List' button
On 17.01.2014 11:38, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2014-01-17 2:12 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On 17.01.2014 10:10, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2014-01-17 1:04 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.01.2014 18:58, schrieb Benny Pedersen:
and RCU maillist now makes it impossible to reply private :(
really? lo
On 2014-01-17 2:12 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On 17.01.2014 10:10, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2014-01-17 1:04 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.01.2014 18:58, schrieb Benny Pedersen:
and RCU maillist now makes it impossible to reply private :(
really? look i did teh impossible!
Really? You call
On 17.01.2014 11:15, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.01.2014 20:12, schrieb Kaz Kylheku:
On 17.01.2014 10:10, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2014-01-17 1:04 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.01.2014 18:58, schrieb Benny Pedersen:
and RCU maillist now makes it impossible to reply private :(
really? look
On 17.01.2014 10:10, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2014-01-17 1:04 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.01.2014 18:58, schrieb Benny Pedersen:
and RCU maillist now makes it impossible to reply private :(
really? look i did teh impossible!
Really? You call replying to the OP, the list AND a 3rd party
On 2014-01-17 1:04 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.01.2014 18:58, schrieb Benny Pedersen:
and RCU maillist now makes it impossible to reply private :(
really? look i did teh impossible!
Really? You call replying to the OP, the list AND a 3rd party (me)
'private'?
Charles Marcus skrev den 2014-01-16 20:27:
On 2014-01-15 1:54 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
thunderbird need a plugin to make it work, roundcube it just works
default
Thunderbird has had a proper 'Reply-To-List' button/feature for a long
time now.\
and RCU maillist now makes it impossible to re
On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 18:24 -0800, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> NB> [I]t annoys me greatly that people find the need to reply directly
> NB> as well as a list, I mean we *are* all on the same list, so we will
> *all*
> NB> yes, including intended recipient, get the post, do people think
> that
> NB> se
On 16.01.2014 17:27, Noel Butler wrote:
On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 16:40 -0800, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> On 16.01.2014 16:02, Noel Butler wrote:
>
> The vast majority of MUA software on the planet has only Reply and
> Reply All. Those users are using Reply All, so as to keep it a group
> discussion.
Whe
On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 16:40 -0800, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> On 16.01.2014 16:02, Noel Butler wrote:
>
> The vast majority of MUA software on the planet has only Reply and
> Reply All. Those users are using Reply All, so as to keep it a group
> discussion.
>
Where did I say we needed another rep
On 16.01.2014 16:02, Noel Butler wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 08:35 +1100, Ben Schmidt wrote:
>
>> On 16/01/14 7:59 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>>> Am 15.01.2014 21:43, schrieb Ben Schmidt:
Another is that sometimes people have direct copies delivered to
their inbox, but copies via
On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 08:35 +1100, Ben Schmidt wrote:
> On 16/01/14 7:59 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> > Am 15.01.2014 21:43, schrieb Ben Schmidt:
> >> Another is that sometimes people have direct copies delivered to
> >> their inbox, but copies via the list filtered into a folder. Such
> >> users wa
On 2014-01-15 1:54 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
thunderbird need a plugin to make it work, roundcube it just works default
Thunderbird has had a proper 'Reply-To-List' button/feature for a long
time now.\
On 2014-01-15 3:04 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
Reply should reply to the sender: the person o
On 15.01.2014 12:43, Ben Schmidt wrote:
As the maintainer of a mailing-list manager, and as a user of mailing
lists, I thought I would chip in.
I think there are uses for all three scenarios: (1) reply to sender
(only), (2) reply to list (only), (3) reply to all (sender, list and
any
CCs).
so there is no solution satisfy all
I agree entirely.
finally *that* is no valid reason for mail duplicates
Equally, it is not a valid reason to filter them. We need to recognise
people and communities are different, that both behaviours are useful,
and valid, and that people who want one ki
As the maintainer of a mailing-list manager, and as a user of mailing
lists, I thought I would chip in.
I think there are uses for all three scenarios: (1) reply to sender
(only), (2) reply to list (only), (3) reply to all (sender, list and any
CCs).
(1) is useful for private replies.
(2)
On 15.01.2014 09:28, Charles Marcus wrote:
On 2014-01-14 7:46 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
I know about the "Reply List" thing; I neglected to mention, in fact,
that I tried both "Reply All" and manually invoking "Reply List", with
identical results.
Look; "Reply All" is obviously doing the righ
Charles Marcus skrev den 2014-01-15 18:28:
Sadly, there are far too many moronic users, even on the technical
side of things.
thunderbird users more or less ?, roundcube users never seen the problem
imho
thunderbird need a plugin to make it work, roundcube it just works
default
___
On 2014-01-14 7:46 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
I know about the "Reply List" thing; I neglected to mention, in fact,
that I tried both "Reply All" and manually invoking "Reply List", with
identical results.
Look; "Reply All" is obviously doing the right thing now as I post
this reply. It's goin
Hello:
I thing RCU list uses mailman as list manager
(http://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/)
Reply-To header is controled by config option "reply_goes_to_list" with
defaults to not to add/modify Reply-To header. This setting is strongly
recommended by mailman developpers. Still, I suppose it
Wake up and look at this:
Reply-To: Roundcube Users mailing list
The RCU mailing list stamps this idiocy on everything that passes
through it.
The mailing list for mail-related software is doing Reply-To munging.
What's wrong with this picture?
That explains why the same people think it'
Of course, doh, that's because Arne's message was not from the list
manager; but directly to me!
(Which is the correct way to do things).
On 14.01.2014 16:46, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> Look; "Reply All" is obviously doing the right thing now as I post this
> reply. It's going to you, Arne, and
I know about the "Reply List" thing; I neglected to mention, in fact,
that I tried both "Reply All" and manually invoking "Reply List", with
identical results.
Look; "Reply All" is obviously doing the right thing now as I post this
reply. It's going to you, Arne, and Cc: to the RCU list!
So
On 2014-01-14 16:12, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Anyone had the following problem?
>
> When replying to a new mailing list posting with "reply all", the reply goes
> only To: the mailing list.
>
> Expected behavior: To: the person, Cc: to the mailing list.
>
> The message in ques
Hi All,
Anyone had the following problem?
When replying to a new mailing list posting with "reply all", the reply
goes only To: the mailing list.
Expected behavior: To: the person, Cc: to the mailing list.
The message in question has no Reply-To: header or anything of the sort.
The relev
35 matches
Mail list logo
