[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: debian_amd64_sarge/testing

Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 11:20:33AM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
>>First, please don't top post.  Second, it is generally not necessary to
>>CC everyone involved in the coversation.  We all read the list.
> Assuming everyone reads the list is not a valid assumption.  People post
> questions at times to the list without being subscribed.  Having them
> miss the answer would be unfortunate.
True, but the custom on Debian mailing lists is that if you are not
subscribed and expect a CC, you should state that in your message or
your sig.

> And some of us are used to dealing with lkml where it is considered very
> unacceptable to not include the cc list.  For heavy mailing list
> traffic, having the cc to you for threads you are directly involved in
> makes it much easier to not miss messages in that thread.
Personally, I follow the threads that interest me, so having CCs sent to
me are neither help nor hindrance.  The only time I can think of when it
was helpful was the recent Spamcop listing problem with murphy, which
slowed nearly all list mail to something like a 24 hour delay.

> You can request that people not CC you in your messages, but don't whine
> if they miss it.  It's even a habit to use reply-all on mailing lists
> for many people because of things like lkml and some badly configured
> lists that have the reply to set to the poster rather than the list.
Since I have been contributing on Debian lists (sometime in 2002), the
"standard etiquette" has always been one of not CCing people unless they
explicitly request it.  There are cases however, when I will CC someone
who doesn't request it (e.g., a newbie who might be getting overwhelmed
with Debian or responses from the list, etc).

> Top posting does suck though.  That one I agree with.

I guess it is just "when in Rome, do as the Romans."


Roberto C. Sanchez

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: