Reply settings on this list have changed

users
#41

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

My feedback is that I don't like the change at all.

I agree. The purpose of a list like this is to share information.
Typically, when a person on a list such as this one hits "REPLY", that
person is participating in the larger conversation, and not intending to
send a private message to a specific person. Since that is the usual
intent, it should be the default.

I have been on some lists that have made this change, and typically
participation drops and group knowledge is lost. I think it's a solution
for a problem that doesn't really exist.

- --
Steven Shelton

#42

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Not trying to be rude. All of you should be smart enough to run an email tool. After all you're all

Linux users who administer at least one Linux installation.

And, crap, this stupid change . . . this is the second time I've had to
send this because I forgot I have to send it to the "list" now.

What makes you think we are all linux users who administer at least one
linux installation?

I am a criminal defense attorney running Windows XP.

- --
Steven Shelton

#43

3 desktops, 2 laptops, 1 tablet - currently out of storage cabinets and setup to run whenever I need it to. More in storage.

1 Blu-ray Player with Internet content apps.

3 network printers [b&w duplexing, color laser, USB printer/copier/scanner/fax], 1 USB printer [printer/scanner/copier], plus one USB printer in storage [just a printer]. each printer bought for specific uses.

running 2 wireless routers, sometimes 3, [one for my network and one for an isolated shared network for my neighbors [those I give the pass-code to] to get access to the Internet. The secured shared network cannot access any part of my private one's data or printers.

After 3 strokes and a debilitating back injury, I no longer work. My life is based on pain and stress management. So I read [or listen to books], watch TV, do some work on fixing friends' computers, deal with these lists, and help out several local not-for-profit groups and associations.

I have setup specific computers to do specific functions.

My Dell laptop came with Vista, but I also use it as a test bed for the newest Ubuntu versions. I still use Ubuntu 10.04 on my default desktop [typing on it now], but I use the laptop to see how the newest versions of Ubuntu are working. I found out that for Ubuntu 12.04, I prefer using MATE desktop environment over any other d.e. available for 12.04. I found out that 12.04/MATE will allow the Epson Artisan 810 printer/scanner/copier/fax to work with XSane, while 10.04 cannot get the printer and XSane scanner software to work together.

I have a Ubuntu 10.04 desktop - Dell Optiplex - attached to my flat screen TV to access streaming content that my Blu-ray player cannot access or cannot do it easily. My older HP laptop has a better wifi antenna so it can pick up hot-spots - or my private network - from a greater distance, and more "bars", than my Dell laptop.

My living room is filled with computers, printers, books, DVDs and audio discs, paper supply drawers, plus a bit of this and that, besides a nice comfy chair and my TV and blu-ray systems. Also I have my walker and wheelchair in their places to fill the rest of the room. The only thing in the bedroom that is "electronic" is the CRT-TV and DVD/VCR player.

#44

So you're saying because everyone else you interact with does it wrong, it should also be done wrong here. Allow me to remind you that two (or 50) wrongs don't make a right.

Why is it wrong? Refer to Brian Barker's post wherein he references an RFC. I'd repost what he wrote but I've already deleted it.

For the record, I also hit Reply out of habit on this message, but I LOOKED at what I was sending out, and redid it. No big deal. Certainly not worth complaining about.

#45

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
  

Not trying to be rude. All of you should be smart enough to run an email tool. After all you're all

Linux users who administer at least one Linux installation.

And, crap, this stupid change . . . this is the second time I've had to
send this because I forgot I have to send it to the "list" now.

What makes you think we are all linux users who administer at least one
linux installation?

I am a criminal defense attorney running Windows XP.

+1 (even though I use Linux)

#46

exactly; and well said.

#47

wow, you should be a great attorney;
           you're very expressive.

#48

...

Opera 12.01 also has
Reply
Reply List
Reply to Sender
Reply to All

#49

Sorry,
All of you that resent the change are in error. The RFC requires this change moreover it is much more logical. That Windows users don't understand simple logic is their problem (but understandable).
Joep

#50

On Thunderbird 14.0, I have the following option for this list email:
      Reply
      Reply List [ with drop down option "arrow" for Reply All]
      Forward
      Archive
      Junk
      Delete
plus a drop down box for other options.

I have a couple of Web-based email accounts, but I have to look them up [and their passwords] since I have not used them for more than 6 months. It would be interesting to see of they have the Reply to List option instead of the Reply All option, like Thunderbird has. Those accounts were Hotmail, Yahoo-Mail, Netzero-mail, and a few others that I had to sign up for so I could get access to their free services, for one reason or another. But, I do not use them. I own several domains, so I can create my own email addresses off them anytime I need a new one.

Does Outlook [and the old Outlook Express], and MS's "Mail" package that is on Win7, have the Reply to List option instead of Reply All?

#51

no, this 'reply to list' option does not exist for many of us.

#52

Not in my gmail
steve

#53

        no, this 'reply to list' option does not exist for many of us.

Do you have a reply all option?

You may want to check what email address is used in the To field with reply or reply all.

#54

Dan,

My reply options changed to "reply all" not "reply list" in Thunderbird when I received your email. The to field is your email and the cc is users@global.libreoffice.org.

It appears there is some inconsistent behavior with email clients and webmail sites depending on how they receive the email

Jay

<snip>

#55

I think the safe response when using the changed list settings is use Reply-all. For simplicity, the only instruction to users of the lists that works consistently is Reply-all.

steve

#56

In Outlook 2003 SP3 - Reply = Jay Lozier <jslozier@gmail.com> and
Reply to All = Jay Lozier <jslozier@gmail.com>;users@global.libreoffice.org.
There is no Reply to List in Outlook.

#57

Hello,

this is to inform you that the reply settings on this list have changed (so-called "Reply to mangling" has been disabled).

So far, e-mails had set a reply-to the mailing list address. In other words, with any e-mail client, replies to e-mails on the list were automatically sent directly to the list.

Which is the whole idea of a mailing list IMO.

In the past, this lead to two major problems:

1. Several times, people have sent direct replies to the public list, where deleting them is nearly impossible. I remember at least one case where confidential information has been sent out that caused lots of worries for the sender and his employer. This happened because people hit "reply" and thought it would reply to the sender only.

That some people send private mail in public can't be a good argument to stop/hamper the flow on a miling list - surely?

2. I have heard complaints in the past from people, stating that working with the non-developer lists of LibreOffice is a pain for them, because of reply-to mangling, resulting in a lack of communication. This also led to the fact that numerous tasks were done by the same people, who needed to spend more and more time, instead of sharing the work burden with others. While I do not fully believe this argument, there's just one way to find out...

Therefore, I have applied a change:

Replies to e-mails from the list now only go to the original sender. You either need to use the "reply to all" feature of your e-mail program, or - preferably - the "reply to list"/"reply to group" feature, which will direct replies directly to the list.

This is common practice on most mailing lists, and even the default setting for our mailing list software, so we did not re-invent the wheel here. Those seeking for details should have a look at http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html

I checked every single one of my 52 current mailing lists, and not one single one of them follows that rule (except this one). One of them used the senders email + the list email in the Reply-To field, but that's it. And that list isn't really for discussing, but just for one-way information.

I'd like to see some statistics that shows that 'most mailing lists' does not put the list address in the Reply-To field ?

And where is the RFC?

And the poll?
Looks like most people wants to get it back to how it was, which is how all my other 51 lists still are?
Using the 'Reply to all' option is not a good idea at all IMO.

#58

exactly - well, there is a third option [to forward :wink: ]

       And those are the only options available in the web-based e-mails as
well.

       BTW - I've never seen this supposed 'reply to list' option on any
computer.

In Outlook 2003 SP3 - Reply = Jay Lozier <jslozier@gmail.com> and

#59

exactly;
           this requires having to delete the extraneous e-addresses :wink:

       Therefore, I'd like to know what is the time savings in this vs.
having the reply go to the list ???

       This change isn't anymore logical than some of these responders who
must think we should re-read the old message before finally seeing whatever
new message has been added - and their addition becomes almost lost amongst
the talk unless enough blank lines have been left; logically, the new
message should be where you can read it first - then if you need to
re-fresh your memory, scroll down to see what preceded it.

I think the safe response when using the changed list settings is use

#60

exactly;
           and well expressed.

På Sun, 12 Aug 2012 18:31:07 +0200, skrev Florian Effenberger <