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 the list filtered into a folder. Such >>>> users want both copies. >>> >>> the opposite is true such users *do not* want both copies > > Another rare occasion where I agree with Harald, it annoys me greatly that > people find the need to reply directly as well as a list, I mean we *are* all > on the same list, so we will *all* , yes, including intended recipient, get > the post, do people think that sending it directly will get read sooner? This is not the consequence of anyone's "need". Do not assume that people are doing something you don't like or understand out of their "need". 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. The assumption that "we are in the same list" only holds when all the recipients of the message are subscribers of the list (because it rejects posts from nonsubscribers). Such a policy is made necessary by spammers. Traditionally, a subscriber of a mailing list is not one who wishes to post to it, but one who wishes to be in the loop on all new postings. There currently isn't any fully reliable way for the MUA to know who is a subscriber and who isn't; only the list robot knows. Reply All does the right thing in all circumstances. Mailing list robots know that it's being used and process things intelligently. The new-fangled Reply List is nonstandard, and makes assumptions about how lists are configured. As Ben Schmidt has noted, it is useful in specific circumstances, not as a "go to" button for replying to any posting on any kind of mailing list. > Not always, this account for instance sorts by list, anything not associate > with a list-id or x-been-there, gets sent to an x-blah folder right at the > end, so my inbox stays pretty empty, and your direct messages may not get > read for weeks, as I liken it to a second spam folder There are two good ways to sort list-related discussions into folders. If the list postings have some subject line tag like [RCU], you can use that. A way which does not rely on this subject line hack is this: have your rule look for the address of the list in the Cc: or To: In other words, whenever a given list is one of the recipients of a message, that message can be deemed as being related to that list and shunted to the appropriate folder. This works great for both list replies and direct replies. Yes, if you use list-specific headers to do your sorting, something will happen that you might not necessarily like: direct replies go to your inbox, and only list copies to the list folder. But, this may also be why someone like Ben Schmidt (for whom I obviously cannot speak) may want those two copies. He might want the robot-generated list copies to go to the list folder for reference, where all the threads are intact in their entirety, and those messages in which he is personally mentioned to go to his Inbox, where they get his attention immediately. He can delete the Inbox copies after reading them and replying to some of them, yet have the discussion intact in the appropriate folder.
<<attachment: face-smile.png>>
_______________________________________________ Roundcube Users mailing list users@lists.roundcube.net http://lists.roundcube.net/mailman/listinfo/users
