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

Re: debian-user list information and guidelines : don't use CC mail list

On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 11:37:59AM +0800, Robbi Nespu wrote:
> Hi hello


> I would like ask opinion on a little proposal to add new rule
> regrading using CC with mail list address.
> The reason is, why the sender need to use "TO" to original sender /
> reply-er and CC the mail list, since the original sender / reply-er
> also subscriber to the same mailing list.

Sometimes (s)he is, sometimes not. You don't need a subscription
to post here. This is a conscious decision, to lower the entry
threshold (I haven't contributed to that decision myself, but I
do support it wholly).

> In another case, maybe someone not subscriber but try to help or ask
> for help directly but Debian additional CoC said "Do not quote
> messages that were sent to you by other people in private mail,
> unless agreed beforehand"

This is irrelevant. The above, when someone not subscribed posts a
question, that's what counts here.

> I prepared ASCII table for comparison matrix here[1] have a look, I
> could paste the table here since it may look broken on your email
> client.

Sorry. I'm not clicking on a github link until there is a strong
reason to do so.

> What I wish is to add one more additional code of conduct which
> something like "Do not send or reply email with CC mailing list,
> instead please use TO mailing address to send message if the person
> you want to communicate is coming from mail list" (need better
> sentences)

This discussion comes up here from time to time. It hasn't reached
a clear consensus yet: it's far more complex that it seems, because it
involves mail user agents and the interpretation of not-quite-standard
mail headers.

Do some research on the mailing list archives, and you'll see what
I mean :-)

> Let me know what do you think about it.

To be honest, I'm a bit rubbed the wrong way when you request a
discussion (good!) and come with the result of the discussion ("to
add one more additional code of conduct...").

There will be other positions here, and I expect of everyone to
at least understand the others people's points.

 - t

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: