[NTLUG:Discuss] Some Arguments For and Against

[Greg E]

Kendall Clark wrote:
> 
> All,
> 
> After reading the standard argument contra reply-to munging, I'm a bit less
> sure now. Doh! The contra-munging argument on technical grounds is
> correct, but existing practice, i.e., what most people are used to
> doing, appears to support munging as acceptable.
> 
> Anyway, I'll give the URLs here and let you read for yourself, if
> you're that interested.
> 
> <http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html>
> 
> Best,
> Kendall
> --
> Network Solutions Inc. SUCKS!!
> 
> _______________________________________________


I find it rather ironic when someone says do it my way cause it's the
best way and then skews the reasons to fit.

Under the advice of the author all responses that you want to be posted
back to the list are done with a group (reply all) such that the original
sender always gets multiple copies of each response.  The originator then
has to send multiples to each response (reply all) if they want to keep
the discussion on the list for all to be involved.  Add a third voice in
the mix and now you've got 3 copies of each response going out of your
server of which each person in the reply list receives 2.  Add #4 and #5
to the same discussion.  Hey makes perfect sense to me.

However it's the WRONG way to do it if you have direct replies going to
the list and FORCE the responder to do a group response to respond directly
to the originator and the list.

JMO, the logic he spouts is counter to what a mailing list is suppose to
accomplish.

  1. provide information to a broad spectrum of people
  2. promote discussions between people of varied experience and opinions
  3. allow those that do not have direct knowledge to learn in a passive
     forum
  4. allow the same information to be learned by many as a result of the
     consensus of a discussion between others
  5. reduce the load on local servers by allowing a single send to be
     received by many

Would Linux have evolved if all discussions of technical merit had been
limited to 1, 2, or 3 people at a time who just happen to have gotten in
on the beginning of a discussion that became private?

Again this is just my $0.02.

Greg E