Pierpalo asks: "According to your intuition, what should be the difference between<br>an action called "Reply" and another called "Reply to all"?"<br><br><div>My intuitions about what ANY response should be to ANY request for action depend on my personal experience and on the circumstances of the request. And I'm hardly alone in that. In user interface design, this is called "The Principle of Least Astonishment."<div>
<br></div><div> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_astonishment">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_astonishment</a></div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_astonishment"></a>On a mailing list, I'm slightly astonished ("dismayed" would be a better word) when I reply to the list (or so I think) and discover later (IF I ever do) that the reply went to an individual instead. Here, I would expect "Reply" and "Reply to all" to do the same thing. That's redundant, you say? Well, so what? Life is redundant. Then you die.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I understand the argument from risk: Yes, every so often, somebody thinks they are replying to an individual when in fact they are replying to the list. I've done this mysefl, and suffered embarrassment.</div>
<div><br></div><div>But risk correlates with reward, as with anything in life, and a mailing list is *always* a balance between individual risks of embarrassment ("Will I seem stupid to some people? Will the answer to my question come to me a second after I hit Send? Was there an embarrassing typo in what I wrote?") and collective reward: everybody gets to see the answers; the only people who lose are those who find the answer--or the inbox clutter--annoying. (Presumably, the signal averages out to be positive for most; and for those for whom it doesn't, unsubscribing is always an option.) </div>
<div><br></div><div>So, in this case, doing the more expected, less astonishing thing is quite aligned with the spirit of mailing lists, even if it's in violation of the letter of IETF law. Sometimes, the most rational thing to do is not the purely logical thing to do. In those cases, I side with rationality. But look: there's cultural variation. Maybe most people in the Erlang world have different expectations or thresholds of "astonishment". So the most rational 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 people want and do that?</div>
<div><br></div><div>-michael turner</div><div><br></div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Pierpaolo Bernardi <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:olopierpa@gmail.com">olopierpa@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im">On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 07:35, Michael Turner<br>
<<a href="mailto:michael.eugene.turner@gmail.com">michael.eugene.turner@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Does anyone have any statistics on this question? That is, what percentage<br>
> of mailing lists "do it wrong"? It's counterintuitive to me that a "reply"<br>
> on this mailing list is only to the individual. "Reply" is "Reply to the<br>
> list" on every other mailing list I'm currently on, and on almost every<br>
> mailing list I can remember being on. But perhaps my lifetime mailing list<br>
> membership doesn't approach statistical significance.<br>
> Although it may get me accused of "blindly following the herd," let me<br>
> assert it anyway: arguments from "intuition" in commonly used software<br>
> interfaces only work when you have statistically significant user support<br>
> for them, not some purely formal, rule-based argument for your *personal*<br>
> intuition. What's "intuitive" to one person may be counterintuitive to many.<br>
<br>
</div>According to your intuition, what should be the difference between<br>
an action called "Reply" and another called "Reply to all"?<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>