[erlang-questions] 'reply-to' header in this mailing list

[Pierpaolo Bernardi]

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:28, Alex Shneyderman <a.shneyderman@REDACTED> 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.