[erlang-questions] mailing list "reply to"

YC yinso.chen@REDACTED
Sat Dec 4 05:21:28 CET 2010

Hi Jesse -

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Jesse Gumm <sigmastar@REDACTED> wrote:

> For me, it makes more sense to mangle the reply-to header since 99% of
> the time, I'm replying to the mailing list rather than do the
> individual.  It makes more sense to me to make the default behavior be
> the most common behavior.  I view a mailing list as just another way
> of implementing an online forum, and in that regard, the default
> action is to reply to the thread, rather than via PM.

Maybe it is easier to picture this way - what if some of the forums you
frequent all the sudden change their default behavior to pm'ing instead of
replying to forum?  Will that perhaps catch you by surprise?

That's the same with mailing lists not obeying internet standards - they
surprise the heck out of people when all the sudden reply no longer just
goes to the sender, unfortunately just when they need to private message.
 You might think mailing list is the same as forums, but mail clients *are
not* forums.  Reply means replying to sender, and mailing list munging
reply-to are breaking the expected behavior of mail clients.

Hopefully you won't ever inadvertently send a private reply to public when
your 1% need arise, but if you ever do, you will appreciate why mailing
lists should interoperate with the standards instead of breaking them.

My last 2 cents on this off-topic thread.  Cheers,

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list