[AusNOG] Reply to list or sender ?

[Trent Lloyd]

All,

On 08/08/2009, at 7:44 AM, Noel Butler wrote:

> Hi David,
>
> On Fri, 2009-08-07 at 22:09 +1000, David Hughes wrote:
>>
>> You know, the number of complaints I get about the "reply to list"
>> setup is amazing.  I also think it's not ideal.  I'd be happier with
>> the list setup with reply to sender (as is nanog, c-nsp, ietf etc etc
>> etc).   Thoughts?
>>
>>
>> David
>> ...
>>
>
> My opinion is, if someone on a public mailing list says something,  
> then they should expect the reply on the list.
>
> Think someone asks a question about a rare and unusual  
> configuration, someone answers that person, answering to the list  
> benefits all (archives/fresh ideas blah blah blah), answering  
> direct, nobody is any the wiser, the correct way for a list to be  
> setup is reply-to list and apart from the handful of lists you  
> mentioned, that's how it is on every list I'm subscribed to, and on  
> those that it isn't half the people end up replying to all so we get  
> two copies of everything :)

I also agree.. the problem overall I guess is its a change from what  
people expected on this list from the start.  But if you are going to  
say something a bit sensitive then yeh you should double check ..  
mistakes happen but also how much useful knowledge will we hide from  
the world because the opposite happens - people send personal e-mails  
instead of list ones.

Most lists the "default" mode should be reply to list .. (as in what  
you want to do, regardless of the settings), this list probably  
differs from that norm a little more than most but it's also much  
easier in most mail clients to hit 'reply to all' and delete the list  
address than it is to find the list address to put in there when you  
hit reply; and people are usually mindful of those cases (i.e. request  
for NOC contacts and the like)

My $4.53

Regards,
Trent
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20090808/2bf579b2/attachment.html>