On Sun, 3 Dec 2000 12:54:52 -0700 James Giles
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dan Nagle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> ...
> >The number of times I've made lunch dates on comp-fortran-90
> >is safely in the less than epsilon range.
>
> I gave the lunch date idea as an obvious counterexample to
> the idea that it was never appropriate to send only to the
> author. Others might consist of:
>
> "This is way off topic, but I'd be interested in a protracted
> discussion of your algorithm for solving Lanchester's equations.
> The usual solution is to simulate with a markov chain. Your
> solution looks like it might be both more efficient and more
> flexible. ..."
>
> or
>
> "If I make this comment on the open list, it will almost certainly
> cause a flame war. But what do you think about deleting feature
> so-and-so from the standard as soon as possible. It's worse
> than useless - since is obscures the intent of ....."
>
> I take discussions off-line all the time. It is not appropriate
> to completely remove any convenient means of doing so.
>
> >The number of times I've replied to discuss Fortran (or even
> >the Fortran mailing list :-) is substantial. Far and away the
> >most common is a reply to the group. The most common, IMHO,
> >should be the default.
>
> Fine, make replies to the list be the default behavior in some way
> that does *NOT* remove the appropriate reply address. I'd
> like a direct way to reply only to the list as well (in the old list,
> I had to select "reply to all" and then delete the author's address).
> There's no doubt about it, replying to the list is the most common.
> There's no doubt about it, the most common should be the default.
> But, *ONLY* if it doesn't remove the second most common
> selection entirely.
>
> >I others feel strongly contrariwise, I'll just have to go on
> >mangling To: lists. :-)
>
> So will I. But it's better than not having the other address at all.
>
> >I like things as they are. Thanks to the list manager for
> >fighting all the battles.
>
> I think there should have been a vote before a substantial change
> to the way the list works was made.
>
the message i got as list owner from jiscmail was that
the list move was going to be transparent :-)
i'm in the process of reading a 200 + page listserv listowner
manual.
i'm also in the process of trying to get hold of rfc's
on a number of items including the one on headers that
robin has reported errors with.
> --
> J. Giles
i'm still struggling with my own email client and
changes with signatures.
--
^
Ian
[log in to unmask]
Home page
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/kis/support/cit//fortran/
|