On Fri, 2004-01-23 at 17:07, Jacob Fugal wrote: > True :) But what if the material in the mistakenly broadcast email was > sensitive in some other way? It's the risk of accidental dissemination > of sensitive material vs. accidental restriction of audience. The latter > is easy to correct, the former nigh impossible.
Then it shouldn't have gone through email anyway. Sending a clear text message and assuming no one will reader it is pretty foolish no matter what the To: line contains. The equation is really very simple: Most MUA are deficient; they lack a reply-to-list feature. + Most replies to list message are probably meant for the list. = Therefore, optimize for the most common use. Sending two replies to the original sender is hardly a solution. It's an ugly hack that actually creates a greater problem. If you really want to solve the problem, start submitting patches to OSS projects. Then start sending feature _demands_ to proprietary software vendors and web application providers. Good luck, Sisyphus. -- Stuart Jansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED], AIM:StuartMJansen> âThe programmer, like the poet, works only slightly removed from pure thought-stuff. He builds his castles in the air, from air, creating by exertion of the imagination. Few media of creation are so flexible, so easy to polish and rework, so readily capable of realizing grand conceptual structures.â -- Fredrick Brooks, Mythical Man Month
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
____________________ BYU Unix Users Group http://uug.byu.edu/ ___________________________________________________________________ List Info: http://uug.byu.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uug-list
