Re: Private copies of list replies
On 13 Mar 2006, Matthias Julius told this:
> Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> It is unacceptable to people who want a CC? They are the ones
>> asking for a favour. If they want a special treatment, different
>> from the default mailing list policy, either they put that favour
>> request in a manner I am going to respond to, or they do not get a
>> CC. As simple as that.
> And there is nothing wrong with that. There is no policy that
> requires you to honor this request. It is your decision.
>> My MUA shall respect MFT headers, so people shall get CC's if
>> they set it. If they say something in the body, since it is not
>> automated, it depends on whether I notice it, and am inclined to do
>> them the favour or not. It's a crap shoot.
> I agree a note in the body is not reliable. But, MFT isn't neither.
> At least my MUA makes it very easy to follow the request for CC.
Quite. My MUA makes the former automated, and the latter is
manually adding a CC, which, while not difficult, is still a manual
> Anyway, how big is the problem? In the last two weeks I havn't
> noticed any post to the Debian lists I read that requested a private
> If you'd like so much for MFT to become widely accepted you should
> lobby for it to become formal standard.
I really don't care. I don't ask for private CC's; if I want
an answer, I join the list, or follow it on gmane, or otherwise do
not add to the burden of people I am asking help or input from.
I am just helpfully pointing out to people who want a CC that
adding a MFT would get them what they want from people with MUA's
QOTD: "Like this rose, our love will wilt and die."
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C