Hi, On 2021-08-06 8:20 a.m., tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Fri, Aug 06, 2021 at 07:33:04AM -0400, The Wanderer wrote: >> On 2021-08-06 at 07:28, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Aug 06, 2021 at 06:54:53AM -0400, Polyna-Maude >>> Racicot-Summerside wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>> >>> [...] >>> >>>> Maybe this is obvious for you, but for myself, I don't take note >>>> of who's "on the list" and "who's not" [...] >>> >>> Easy: if the message comes from the list, reply goes to the list. >>> Your MUA should be able to help you with that, if it's worth its >>> salt. >> >> I get enough accidental direct replies (proportionally speaking, anyway) >> that I don't consider this practical. There are too many times when a >> reply that was sent privately *should* have gone via the list, and so >> the reply to that should go in turn back to the list. > > Definitely. I don't get it perfectly every time, either. I only took > issue with Polina's stance, which could be read as "it's not even > worth trying". > If you can read my mind then you'd know that it's not what I was thinking. If you can't read my mind, then maybe it's better to keep quiet than to say stuff you don't have a damn clue about. On my dumb GUI mail client, I don't see the whole header unless I do ask to do so. I didn't see no where something saying that it was needed to use a specific mail client or take the time to interpret the headers. So I'll go with a hint. If someone bothers you, then simply use the "block" possibility and send their mail to the SPAM folder of your mail client. Like you already said, if it's worth the salt, it will do so. >> (Which in turn happens because of the whole Reply-To-header argument >> thing, and everything around it which I don't want to spark off again >> now...) > > :-) > >> That said, there are definitely times when it's clear whether a direct >> reply was unintentional vs. not, and outside of special circumstances >> the ones intentionally sent off-list should be kept that way without >> mutual agreement. > > Of course, a banned person can try to sneak in by cc-ing to the list. > A group reply is then all it's needed. > > "Apply some judgement" seems, as always, to be the right thing. > > Cheers > - t > -- Polyna-Maude R.-Summerside -Be smart, Be wise, Support opensource development
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature