'reply-to' header in this mailing list

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
51 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Ivan Uemlianin
Thunderbird has a "reply list" option in the GUI, so this issue must
have been sufficiently annoying to the hackers at the Mozilla Foundation.

Ivan


--
============================================================
Ivan A. Uemlianin
Speech Technology Research and Development

                     [hidden email]
                      www.llaisdy.com
                          llaisdy.wordpress.com
                      www.linkedin.com/in/ivanuemlianin

     "Froh, froh! Wie seine Sonnen, seine Sonnen fliegen"
                      (Schiller, Beethoven)
============================================================
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Michael Turner
In reply to this post by Pierpaolo Bernardi
"I would like to understand *why* you don't  judge this very simple solution to your problem as adeguate."

It's not just about me. It's about people who have never encountered this controversy before, because they're on normal mailing lists, and who write their first-ever message (and many more afterward) to *this* list. People who haven't even subscribed yet.

So, what do you propose?  Something like this, perhaps: In the sign-on message for new subscribers to the Erlang mailing list, we include a message saying, "Get in the habit of always using 'Reply all' instead of 'Reply', for *all* of your e-mail correspondence, and after a while, you won't find it annoying in the least that this mailing list has 'Reply-to' set only to the address of the message sender, unlike other mailing lists you're on."

Or, if not that, then exactly *how* do you propose to change the world's habits? (Venture Capitalists have a term for this, when they encounter a business plan that's predicated on people giving up habits: "Boiling the ocean.")

When it's "purely logical versus human nature", human nature always wins.

-michael turner

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Pierpaolo Bernardi <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:28, Alex Shneyderman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> According to your intuition, what should be the difference between
>> an action called "Reply" and another called "Reply to all"?
>
> In the case of this list (or any mailing list) I would expect reply to
> go to the list
> because I am aware of the fact that the discussion is to be conducted on
> that list. If I want to make sure that the email goes to the original author I
> will take extra care/effort to send the reply to that one person.
>
> And it is not just his intuition - my intuition tells me the same
> thing as his :-)

OK. That would be my intuition, too, if there was only one action
available for replying to messages. But in every modern mail client
there are two possibilities, usually labeled something like "reply"
and "reply to all", so my question still stands unanswered.

The people who complain about the correct behaviour could easily
obtain their desired behaviour if they just *don't* use the "reply"
command (Never. Not only for messages coming from properly
configured mailing lists), and *always* use "reply to all" (Always.
Not only for for messages coming for properly configured mailing lists).

I would like to understand *why* you don't  judge this very simple
solution to your problem as adeguate. Really. Mine is not a
rethorical question.

P.


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Robert Virding-2
I have so far studiously avoided getting in any of these discussions. I personally think that the current way is what best corresponds to my view of a mailing-list, it is a list mail addresses. When I post to the list I am really just sending to all the people on the list, it is a practical and simple way of keeping track of to whom I am sending. So a reply is a reply to the sender. This maybe a slightly naïve way of viewing a list but to me this is what a mailing-list is.

If it were a forum, which I think it should be, then it would be a different matter.

Robert

----- "Michael Turner" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> "I would like to understand *why* you don't  judge this very simple solution to your problem as adeguate."

>
It's not just about me. It's about people who have never encountered this controversy before, because they're on normal mailing lists, and who write their first-ever message (and many more afterward) to *this* list. People who haven't even subscribed yet.

>
So, what do you propose?  Something like this, perhaps: In the sign-on message for new subscribers to the Erlang mailing list, we include a message saying, "Get in the habit of always using 'Reply all' instead of 'Reply', for *all* of your e-mail correspondence, and after a while, you won't find it annoying in the least that this mailing list has 'Reply-to' set only to the address of the message sender, unlike other mailing lists you're on."

>
Or, if not that, then exactly *how* do you propose to change the world's habits? (Venture Capitalists have a term for this, when they encounter a business plan that's predicated on people giving up habits: "Boiling the ocean.")

>
When it's "purely logical versus human nature", human nature always wins.

>
-michael turner
>

>
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Pierpaolo Bernardi <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:28, Alex Shneyderman <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> According to your intuition, what should be the difference between
> >> an action called "Reply" and another called "Reply to all"?
> >
> > In the case of this list (or any mailing list) I would expect reply to
> > go to the list
> > because I am aware of the fact that the discussion is to be conducted on
> > that list. If I want to make sure that the email goes to the original author I
> > will take extra care/effort to send the reply to that one person.
> >
> > And it is not just his intuition - my intuition tells me the same
> > thing as his :-)
>
>
OK. That would be my intuition, too, if there was only one action
> available for replying to messages. But in every modern mail client
> there are two possibilities, usually labeled something like "reply"
> and "reply to all", so my question still stands unanswered.
>
> The people who complain about the correct behaviour could easily
> obtain their desired behaviour if they just *don't* use the "reply"
> command (Never. Not only for messages coming from properly
> configured mailing lists), and *always* use "reply to all" (Always.
> Not only for for messages coming for properly configured mailing lists).
>
> I would like to understand *why* you don't  judge this very simple
> solution to your problem as adeguate. Really. Mine is not a
> rethorical question.
>
> P.
>

>
> _______________________________________________ erlang-questions mailing list [hidden email] http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Raimo Niskanen-2
In reply to this post by Michael Turner
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 05:36:43PM +0900, Michael Turner wrote:
:
> thing would probably be to put it to a vote, on the list. After all, the
> issue's just going to come up again, chewing up yet more of that "bandwidth"
> that Raimo's so worried about conserving. So why not just find out what most

That was an expression that means mine and others mental bandwidth.

> people want and do that?
>
> -michael turner

--

/ Raimo Niskanen, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Pierpaolo Bernardi
In reply to this post by Michael Turner
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:00, Michael Turner
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> So, what do you propose?

I propose doing nothing.  8^)

Cheers
P.
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Frédéric Trottier-Hébert
I personally see a practical side to the current list functionality. Get it wrong and you can re-send your e-mail to the list without any embarrassment. Get it wrong in a list where 'Reply' emails to the list and you might be disclosing personal or private information to the public, only for it to later be indexed by search engines.

One clearly has worse non-reversible consequences than the other. My vote is to keep things the way they are right now.

--
Fred Hébert
http://www.erlang-solutions.com
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Raimo Niskanen-2
In reply to this post by Alexander Krasnukhin
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 01:04:58PM +0200, Alexander Krasnukhin wrote:
> Hej,
>
> Why this mailing list doesn't add itself to the 'reply-to' header? I see it
> isn't uncommon for subscribers to send message to the author directly
> instead of the list.
>
> I wonder why?

1) This is an old mailing list. It has been around since 1997,
   which is long before Google et.al started to violate then
   already accepted mailing list behaviours probably with the
   intention to unify forum like behaviour with mailing lists.
   It has always been like this, expect for a short while when
   I changed mailing list software and accidentally configured
   the behaviour you ask and the list exploded with dislike.
   The existing subscribers expect this behaviour.

2) It is according to Internet standards.

3) It lowers the probability of sending privately intended mails
   to the list.

One might argue that it is not proven that the majority of
the currently existing subscribers actually want it this way.
That is correct, but it is just a few new subscribers asking
this question getting little positive response from the
existing subscribers. And we all have other things to do than
to dig up already worn out arguments in this futile debate.

If a large number of old reliable subscribers start voicing
the opinion that this Reply-To setting is now a bad idea
we might change the setting. Such a controversial change
would require a _large_ majority.

I anyone tries to start a flamewar about changing the Reply-To
setting it will be regarded as off-topic and nonproductive
and they will end up ignored or banned.

>
> --
> Regards,
> Alexander

> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions


--

/ Raimo Niskanen, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Raimo Niskanen-2
In reply to this post by Alexander Krasnukhin
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 05:07:50PM +0200, Alexander Krasnukhin wrote:
> Yes, yes. I've got this. People from telecom will always rely on standards
> instead of people expectations. Good. Right. Understandable.

There are standards and often conflicting standards. We have already
made a delibirate choiche of which standards we believe in.

There are different people expecting different things.
Newcomers to a list should not expect that all oldtimers
expect the same as themselves.

If this list behaviour feels differently than other list it
depends which lists you regard as the other. Many lists
today are really Google groups, and they seem to have chosen
to violate Internet standards since they are more like a
forum, and in forums private messages do not exist.

The default setting for both Majordomo and Mailman is to
not munge Reply-To, and their documentation discourages
changing this. All mailing lists at e.g openbsd.org
do not munge Reply-To.


--

/ Raimo Niskanen, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Dmitrii Dimandt-2
In reply to this post by Richard A. O'Keefe-2

I'd disagree with you on that. I receive an email from the list. I send my emails to the list. It's one sender and one recepient. So I expect Reply-To to send my email back to the list.

Moreover, if you hit "Reply All", you'll end up sending multiple emails to seemingly random people:

Right now this email will be sent To: Richard O'Keefe, CC: Alexandr Krasnukhin, Erlang Questions.  Both you and Alexandr will end up with two copies of my letter (one sent directly from me and one sent from the mailing list). This is clearly not the behaviour I'd want when I want to reply to a message from the mailing list.

The number of recepients varies depending on which email you reply to, but the idea is the same. Instead of sending one email to one recepient (the list) I end up spamming people :)

So what do I have do now? I have to delete all the extra emails and move Erlang Questions to the "To:" field. This way I increase the chance that the recepient(s) will also reply to the list and not to me directly.

>
> On 18/05/2011, at 3:07 AM, Alexander Krasnukhin wrote:
>
>> Yes, yes. I've got this. People from telecom will always rely on standards instead of people expectations. Good. Right. Understandable.
>
> That sounds a bit sarcastic.
> The thing is that the Erlang mailing list behaves *EXACTLY* the way I expect
> a mailing list to work.
> I expect "Reply All" to reply to everyone on the list.
> I expect "Reply" to go just to the author.
> I expect it to work the way mailing lists always used to work.
>
> The standard in this case is not arbitrary, but part of a coherent
> design to ensure a straightforward user experience.
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Alexander Krasnukhin
In reply to this post by Raimo Niskanen-2
Seriously, I do understand your point. It wasn't a sarcasm or a joke. 

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Raimo Niskanen <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 05:07:50PM +0200, Alexander Krasnukhin wrote:
> Yes, yes. I've got this. People from telecom will always rely on standards
> instead of people expectations. Good. Right. Understandable.

There are standards and often conflicting standards. We have already
made a delibirate choiche of which standards we believe in.

There are different people expecting different things.
Newcomers to a list should not expect that all oldtimers
expect the same as themselves.

If this list behaviour feels differently than other list it
depends which lists you regard as the other. Many lists
today are really Google groups, and they seem to have chosen
to violate Internet standards since they are more like a
forum, and in forums private messages do not exist.

The default setting for both Majordomo and Mailman is to
not munge Reply-To, and their documentation discourages
changing this. All mailing lists at e.g openbsd.org
do not munge Reply-To.


--

/ Raimo Niskanen, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions



--
Regards,
Alexander


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Robert Virding-2
In reply to this post by Alexander Krasnukhin
How about we completely side-step the whole issue and re-structure the various erlang mailing lists a forum instead? And by choosing one of the common and free forum packages we will automatically get a standard (in the sense of being common and much used) behaviour.

This is also a serious suggestion.

Robert

----- "Alexander Krasnukhin" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Seriously, I do understand your point. It wasn't a sarcasm or a joke. 
>
>
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Raimo Niskanen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 05:07:50PM +0200, Alexander Krasnukhin wrote:
> > Yes, yes. I've got this. People from telecom will always rely on standards
> > instead of people expectations. Good. Right. Understandable.
>
>
There are standards and often conflicting standards. We have already
> made a delibirate choiche of which standards we believe in.
>
> There are different people expecting different things.
> Newcomers to a list should not expect that all oldtimers
> expect the same as themselves.
>
> If this list behaviour feels differently than other list it
> depends which lists you regard as the other. Many lists
> today are really Google groups, and they seem to have chosen
> to violate Internet standards since they are more like a
> forum, and in forums private messages do not exist.
>
> The default setting for both Majordomo and Mailman is to
> not munge Reply-To, and their documentation discourages
> changing this. All mailing lists at e.g openbsd.org
> do not munge Reply-To.
>
>
> --
>
>
> / Raimo Niskanen, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>

>

> --
> Regards,
> Alexander
>
>
> _______________________________________________ erlang-questions mailing list [hidden email] http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Jack Moffitt
> How about we completely side-step the whole issue and re-structure the
> various erlang mailing lists a forum instead? And by choosing one of the
> common and free forum packages we will automatically get a standard (in the
> sense of being common and much used) behaviour.

I really dislike forums. it's very easy for me to rapidly read and
reply to any topics on a mailing list, but with a forum I have to 1)
visit a particular page 2) manually click around. I much prefer having
things in an email client which is optimized for the job.

The only advantage to forums in my opinion is that the archives tend
to be much better than mailing list archives.

jack.
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Ivan Uemlianin
On 18/05/2011 15:11, Jack Moffitt wrote:
> I really dislike forums. it's very easy for me to rapidly read and
> reply to any topics on a mailing list, but with a forum I have to 1)
> visit a particular page 2) manually click around. I much prefer having
> things in an email client which is optimized for the job.

+1

--
============================================================
Ivan A. Uemlianin
Speech Technology Research and Development

                     [hidden email]
                      www.llaisdy.com
                          llaisdy.wordpress.com
                      www.linkedin.com/in/ivanuemlianin

     "Froh, froh! Wie seine Sonnen, seine Sonnen fliegen"
                      (Schiller, Beethoven)
============================================================
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Parnell Springmeyer-2
In reply to this post by Michael Turner
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Um, isn't it client specific and not list specific? Every list I've been
a part of has a broad reply. So if I send a reply to
[hidden email] with the "Re: [erlang-questions] 'reply-to'
header in this mailing list" subject it goes to everyone on that list.

If I do a wide reply (Emacs: Shft-f) it will send the reply message to
the specific person I'm replying to /and/ it will send it to the list
(as is happening with this email).

I can also send just the reply to the list, or just a reply to the
specific person. They are just different commands.

As it stands, the mailing list does exactly what I expect it to. Maybe
your software is what's not living up to your familiarity/intuitive
standards?

Michael Turner <[hidden email]> writes:

> Does anyone have any statistics on this question? That is, what
> percentage of mailing lists "do it wrong"? It's counterintuitive to me
> that  a "reply" on this mailing list is only to the individual. "Reply"
> is "Reply to the list" on every other mailing list I'm currently on,
> and on almost every mailing list I can remember being on. But perhaps
> my lifetime mailing list membership doesn't approach statistical
> significance.
>
> Although it may get me accused of "blindly following the herd," let me
> assert it anyway: arguments from "intuition" in commonly used software
> interfaces only work when you have statistically significant user
> support for them, not some purely formal, rule-based argument for your
> *personal* intuition. What's "intuitive" to one person may be
> counterintuitive to many. As pointed out long ago, "intuitive equals
> familiar":
>
>   http://www.asktog.com/papers/raskinintuit.html
>
> And, as pointed out even longer ago, "a foolish consistency is the
> hobgoblin of small minds." (Emerson.)
>
> Perhaps to some people, a mailing list is like a noticeboard in a
> mostly-empty hallway. My mental model of a mailing list corresponds
> more closely to a conversation in a classroom. When you reply to an
> open question or comment in such a context, you cannot help but be
> heard by more than one person; most likely you'll be heard by everyone
> in the room. You actually have to make a special effort (i.e., lean
> over and whisper in an ear, or pass a note) to be sure that your reply
> is private. I think this corresponds pretty closely to the intuition of
> the average mailing list user. But erlangeurs may be different, I don't
> know.
>
> -michael turner
>
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Richard O'Keefe <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>     On 18/05/2011, at 3:07 AM, Alexander Krasnukhin wrote:
>    
>     > Yes, yes. I've got this. People from telecom will always rely on
>     standards instead of people expectations. Good. Right.
>     Understandable.
>    
>     That sounds a bit sarcastic.
>     The thing is that the Erlang mailing list behaves *EXACTLY* the way
>     I expect
>     a mailing list to work.
>     I expect "Reply All" to reply to everyone on the list.
>     I expect "Reply" to go just to the author.
>     I expect it to work the way mailing lists always used to work.
>    
>     The standard in this case is not arbitrary, but part of a coherent
>     design to ensure a straightforward user experience.
>    
>     _______________________________________________
>     erlang-questions mailing list
>     [hidden email]
>     http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

- --
Parnell "ixmatus" Springmeyer (http://ixmat.us)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJN0+AwAAoJEPvtlbpI1POL1XsIAKqeSs9CILOT9zgaV74S89Ij
kWSsf70Kh+MQeG0Q0L84YO1YvZ9vKcPiN3sShzGuVHddIPDJESOSJT5v0wNb9T6I
LUU1cY+QMkoOBE8NUCQV6xcS6go5SjF0/gWbdWTH/uvRy0LVRIBnsbM+nFCPmLCr
cAlNB7ZOi8T1VGZk0jIGoknolzrAL8BuHua5KpZcJns5D8xn0sBOiZZEJzIZTGRG
MJ1FYPDp4V61QI+vrUlZxb2OqHej60yhG9kzcyzlAd3Np6vCscFB0hZ0iQzAVcVi
ruT+Z5xD8+F3YcxhafIENGJTWetsNzgVO6khVkdVBaw5AYc97/yquNqLOfLokME=
=4PpW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Pierpaolo Bernardi
In reply to this post by Ivan Uemlianin
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 16:18, Ivan Uemlianin <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 18/05/2011 15:11, Jack Moffitt wrote:
>>
>> I really dislike forums. it's very easy for me to rapidly read and
>> reply to any topics on a mailing list, but with a forum I have to 1)
>> visit a particular page 2) manually click around. I much prefer having
>> things in an email client which is optimized for the job.
>
> +1

+1
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Raimo Niskanen-2
In reply to this post by Jack Moffitt
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 08:11:17AM -0600, Jack Moffitt wrote:

> > How about we completely side-step the whole issue and re-structure the
> > various erlang mailing lists a forum instead? And by choosing one of the
> > common and free forum packages we will automatically get a standard (in the
> > sense of being common and much used) behaviour.
>
> I really dislike forums. it's very easy for me to rapidly read and
> reply to any topics on a mailing list, but with a forum I have to 1)
> visit a particular page 2) manually click around. I much prefer having
> things in an email client which is optimized for the job.
>
> The only advantage to forums in my opinion is that the archives tend
> to be much better than mailing list archives.

The archive is a plus for a forum.

There does not seem to be any religious user fractions disaggreing on
how forums should behave. That is also a plus.

Free forum packages often means PHP, MySQL or other sysadm hazzles.
They are more complicated than a mailing list. That is a minus for a forum
(from my point of view). There is of course other party forum hosting,
but they we loose control of the forum archives...

>
> jack.
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

--

/ Raimo Niskanen, Erlang/OTP, Ericsson AB
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Jeff Schultz
In reply to this post by Robert Virding-2
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 02:06:37PM +0000, Robert Virding wrote:
> How about we completely side-step the whole issue and re-structure
> the various erlang mailing lists a forum instead? And by choosing one
> of the common and free forum packages we will automatically get a
> standard (in the sense of being common and much used) behaviour.

> This is also a serious suggestion.

-1.  The mailing list works well the way it is.

(As far as my, personal, workflow is concerned, forum software makes
it hard work for me to collect the material I will want to look at
again and catalogue it to suit my needs.  I suppose businesses like
Google prefer that because they can serve me new ads each time I look
for something I remember seeing last year that might be helpful to me
right now.  I see that as their problem, not mine.)


    Jeff Schultz
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

dmercer
In reply to this post by Robert Virding-2

My comments in-line with reply below.

 

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Robert Virding
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 9:07 AM
To: Alexander Krasnukhin
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [erlang-questions] 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

 

How about we completely side-step the whole issue and re-structure the various erlang mailing lists a forum instead? And by choosing one of the common and free forum packages we will automatically get a standard (in the sense of being common and much used) behaviour.

This is also a serious suggestion.

 

[DBM] What’s the difference between a forum and a mailing list?  I tend to think of forums as being something like Usenet, but I haven’t used that in years.  Some people seem to think they’re like Google Groups, which I don’t really use that much.  Can someone please elucidate the distinction between a mailing list and a forum?

 

Thanks.

 

DBM


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

Vance Shipley
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:35:14AM -0500, David Mercer wrote:
}  Can someone please elucidate the distinction between a mailing
}  list and a forum?

I have come to the conclusion that what is beneath these sort
of debates amounts to a generational gap.  Those who grew up
with a mouse in their hands have different expectations than
those of us who grew up with our hands planted on the keyboard
looking at a command prompt.  As one of the later my view is
that the distinction is:

        mailing list:  push
        forum:         pull

--
        -Vance
_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

OvermindDL1


On May 19, 2011 10:57 AM, "Vance Shipley" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:35:14AM -0500, David Mercer wrote:
> }  Can someone please elucidate the distinction between a mailing
> }  list and a forum?
>
> I have come to the conclusion that what is beneath these sort
> of debates amounts to a generational gap.  Those who grew up
> with a mouse in their hands have different expectations than
> those of us who grew up with our hands planted on the keyboard
> looking at a command prompt.  As one of the later my view is
> that the distinction is:
>
>        mailing list:  push
>        forum:         pull
>
> --
>        -Vance
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

Why can it not just be configurable on a person by person basis by editing their own user preferences on the mailing list server?

Certainly the mailing list software is not so poorly designed so as to require such a person specific option to be set only globally.  ;-)


_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[hidden email]
http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
123