[NCLUG] users only

[Mike Loseke]

Thus spake Matthew Wilcox:
> 
> On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 08:54:50AM -0600, Mike Loseke wrote:
> >  Yes, I have, and I must say, opinions are a wonderful thing. But basically
> > it's just 6 of one, half a dozen of another.
> 
> sure, but it's worth considering the source of the opinion too.  this guy
> is one of the elm authors.  what's your claim to fame?

 I am a lower form of life called an "end user". I don't contribute to the
codebase but I use it everyday.  As is evidenced in his own writings (but
I couldn't see the forum for that page as it is broken) us end-users have
requested a third 'reply' function to make all of this moot, but they, in
their wisdom, have not seen the need so it has not been implemented.

> > One of the drawbacks to having to do
> > a group reply is that the author gets two copies. Peachy. Unless you edit
> > the headers everytime.
> 
> or you use procmail to filter it out.  or you just hit the `d' key.

 So are Michael C. and I in the minority here? Yes it's a simple process
to rewrite the headers. It's simpler not to have to.  Why should I have
to write an additional procmail header to weed out duplicate messages?
That's unnecessary work. For the un-sophisticated mail and filter users,
which make up an important part of the membership of this list, it's easiest
and most convienent to have it set to go to the group.  Folks are trying
to get questions answered and the more eyes on the question the better.
If the user unintentionally wanders down a reply-path of 1 or 2 other
people it's going to take alot longer to get the answer to their question.
Look back through some of the threads on this list and it's easy to see
what I mean.

 Honestly, I can't see the problem with setting the reply-to to be the
list. Please, enlighten me. For the life of me I cannot see how this is
"harmful". What is being affected by this? Who's losing email? If it's so
harmful, why don't we just use sendmail aliases and group-reply to those?
That'd be easier than dealing with mailing lost software, right? So what
if we're "coddling the brain-dead" (Chip's phrase, not mine), that's a
good thing for this list I always thought. Aren't we here to help the less
experienced users?

 And when did this become the "standard practice"? The NCLUG list has
always, since it's very first inception on the VISLAB machines at CSU, set
the Reply-To as the name of the list. And nobody has ever been killed or
maimed as a result. Why fix it if it ain't broke?

-- 
                  | Those who cannot attack the thought,
   Mike Loseke    | instead attack the thinker.
 mike at verinet.com |            -- Paul Valery, 1871-1945