Re: [OT] mailing lists versus usenet / reply to list, reply-to, reply
On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 01:01:18PM +0100, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Am 2009-01-05 18:13:32, schrieb hose:
> > Just use the least sucky client out there (mutt). It has sane reply,
> > reply-to, and reply-to-list commands, is extremely fast, and can bend
> > to your will if needed, no matter how wrong you are. It's the vim of
> > the email world.
>
> I even know some Windows XP/Vista users, running only a Cygwin
> instance to have "mutt". Maybe its Geeky, but who knows?
I am currently writing this email in vim, spawned via mutt, in Cygwin. I
couldn't get by without it.
Cheers,
--
Eric Gerlach, Network Administrator
Federation of Students
University of Waterloo
p: (519) 888-4567 x36329
e: egerlach@feds.uwaterloo.ca
Reply to:
- References:
- Re: [OT] mailing lists versus usenet / reply to list, reply-to, reply
- From: Moderation Robot <robomod@news.nic.it>
- Re: [OT] mailing lists versus usenet / reply to list, reply-to, reply
- From: "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." <bss@iguanasuicide.net>
- Re: [OT] mailing lists versus usenet / reply to list, reply-to, reply
- From: Ken Teague <kteague@pobox.com>
- Re: [OT] mailing lists versus usenet / reply to list, reply-to, reply
- From: Celejar <celejar@gmail.com>
- Re: [OT] mailing lists versus usenet / reply to list, reply-to, reply
- From: hose <subscriptions@bluemaggottowel.com>
- Re: [OT] mailing lists versus usenet / reply to list, reply-to, reply
- From: Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle@tamay-dogan.net>