Re: [ML ISSUE] reply-to field ?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Roberto � wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 02:21:34PM -0500, Seth Goodman wrote:
>> The OP could have presented his request differently, but I don't think
>> a binary answer in the spirit of "love it or leave it" is particularly
>> helpful. The method of handling Reply-To: in this mailing list is in
>> the minority, and even if people believe it to be better, that puts the
>> burden of explanation on us. Having the question come up over and over
>> again, followed by a generally unsuccessful attempt to convince the
>> questioner that everyone else does it wrong, is the price of doing
>> things this way.
>>
> Actually, no, the burden is not on us. It is really quite simple. When
> you join a group, you adapt to *its* norms and conventions. If you
> don't like, then you are free to leave. Now, asking (politely) for an
> explanation is usually not a problem. However, starting off with "this
> is broken, it needs to change" is not usually welcomed unless you happen
> to carry a great deal of influence in the group.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Roberto
>
Thank you Roberto.
- --
Registerd Linux user #443289 at http://counter.li.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFGDWuoiXBCVWpc5J4RAhcwAKCac+bQagQI3oKKsV1inLlaNsPErACgxvGQ
xLDbUrwOBYJON/CPoGU6MHE=
=OBrI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: