Post by thread:All: [ADMIN]: private vs public reply to addresses

The issues that Olin is replying to are not a result of private reply to settings, but since he has continued to complain about this I need to address it. If you set a private "reply to" address when you post to the PICList, the list server honors that request and passes the posts on to each member with the default reply address set to that individual rather than the list. When replying, that setting can be overridden if you really want to send a reply to the list. If anybody (other than Olin) actually cares about this please let me know and I'll see if I can change it. spam_OUTjamesnewtonTakeThisOuTpiclist.com?subject=NO_PRIVATE_REPLYS> .....jamesnewtonKILLspam@spam@piclist.com?subject=ALLOW_PRIVATE_REPLYS I find it hard to believe that anyone could really object so strongly to allowing another poster (the person to whom one is replying) to specify that they wish the reply to be sent directly rather than via the list. I also find it hard to believe that it is so difficult to just look at the reply address before you hit send and, if you choose not to honor the original posters request to reply privately, just change the address to piclistKILLspammitvma.mit.edu. Olin, referring to people as assholes on the PICList is not encouraged. Please calm down. Also, before we get the results of this poll back, think about this for a second: Are you able to accept the will of the majority (if not that of the list admins) and let this issue go? If you can't, you need to learn about "higher powers." I would suggest leaving the list and attending AA meetings instead. Not that I assume you drink, but it is my opinion, after 7 years clean and sober, that they have the inside track on the acceptance of a need for higher powers, religious or social. Would you rather have received that message privately? James Newton, PICList Admin #3 .....jamesnewtonKILLspam.....piclist.com 1-619-652-0593 phone http://www.piclist.com {Original Message removed}

> I find it hard to believe that anyone could really object so strongly to > allowing another poster (the person to whom one is replying) to specify that > they wish the reply to be sent directly rather than via the list. It seems rather contrary to the purpose of an open discussion forum. > I also find it hard to believe that it is so difficult to just look at the > reply address before you hit send and, if you choose not to honor the > original posters request to reply privately, just change the address to > EraseMEpiclistspam_OUTTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu. No, not difficult to do (as I had to do to send this message), but difficult to remember. It creates a rare inconsistancy - the worst kind. Since the default is what you expect most of the time, the exceptional cases can slip by unnoticed very easily. When it does, your message just appears to go down some black hole with no hint as to why. A number of times I have taken the time to compose a reply only to never see it on the list. It took me a while to figure out why. I bet this has happened to others too. One time this happened I was trying to post some source code for stuff that more than one person was discussing. > Olin, referring to people as assholes on the PICList is not encouraged. OK, but it did finally get a response. I mentioned this much more subtly a few times and was ignored. I bet there are others who have no idea why their replies get "lost" on occasion. Even if you simply responded in effect "That's the way it is because that's how those of us in charge want it. If you don't like it, too bad." it would have at least clarified things and put the matter to rest. > Please calm down. Also, before we get the results of this poll back, think > about this for a second: Are you able to accept the will of the majority (if > not that of the list admins) and let this issue go? If you can't, you need > to learn about "higher powers." I would suggest leaving the list and > attending AA meetings instead. Not that I assume you drink, but it is my > opinion, after 7 years clean and sober, that they have the inside track on > the acceptance of a need for higher powers, religious or social. > > Would you rather have received that message privately? I don't mind at all, James. I bet you feel better getting that off your chest. I suspect it wouldn't have had quite the same effect if you'd said it to me privately ;-) ***************************************************************** Olin Lathrop, embedded systems consultant in Devens Massachusetts (978) 772-3129, olinspam_OUTcognivis.com, http://www.cognivis.com -- http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList @spam@piclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspammitvma.mit.edu

>> Olin, referring to people as assholes on the PICList is not encouraged. > >OK, but it did finally get a response. I mentioned this much more subtly a >few times and was ignored. I bet there are others who have no idea why >their replies get "lost" on occasion. Even if you simply responded in >effect "That's the way it is because that's how those of us in charge want >it. If you don't like it, too bad." it would have at least clarified things >and put the matter to rest. Hmm, brave man this Olin, or stupid :-) ??? People here have died for less (well figuratively anyway) and ... Hello, hello, anyone there .... ?:-) >> Would you rather have received that message privately? > >I don't mind at all, James. I bet you feel better getting that off your >chest. I suspect it wouldn't have had quite the same effect if you'd said >it to me privately ;-) Nah. then I wouldn't have read it and wondered why people were getting tetchy with our long suffering & under (actually un) paid list admins. (I have to build up some credit with them for next time I'm at risk :-) ) Seriously though - it's probably best to let ever so slightly higher powers such as list admins have a little bit of lee way in how things are run in the interests of us all. Failure to do so can result in sobering experiences :-) RM {Quote hidden}> > >***************************************************************** >Olin Lathrop, embedded systems consultant in Devens Massachusetts >(978) 772-3129, RemoveMEolinTakeThisOuTcognivis.com, http://www.cognivis.com > >-- >http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList >spamBeGonepiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu > > > -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: "[PIC]:" PIC only "[EE]:" engineering "[OT]:" off topic "[AD]:" ad's

> Olin, referring to people as assholes on the PICList is not encouraged. > Please calm down. I second that. Although I think it is annoying to have reply-to: private on list postings, I strongly doubt that a majority of the "offenders" do it deliberately. I for one don't know my current settings and if I post with reply-to or not, but I do know that I did for YEARS because my From: address was suject to change frequently and the Reply-To: was an alias that was guaranteed to work over the whole time. Setting Reply-To was the default behaviour of my setup. It's a fault of the list server to think that Reply-To is something that the poster selects particularily for the list posting and with knowledge of the implications. Therefore if anything should be changed at all, it is the list server, not the "assholes". (a pity in the context of this discussion is that many users split the incoming mail into folders by their subject. If someone writes a special private response, deliberately or by oversight of Reply-To, it might be misinterpreted by the recipient just as well - it might end up in the mailing list folder and be perceived as public posting). -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: "[PIC]:" PIC only "[EE]:" engineering "[OT]:" off topic "[AD]:" ad's

Sigh... This is why there's a "reply to all" selection, or a "Use REPLY-TO address?" question in every mail reader I've ever seen... and yeah, it takes me all of five seconds to remove James' email address from the TO: line so it goes just to the list and doesn't CC: James. This is an issue on every list I subscribe to. Big hairy deal. Live with it. Sheesh. Dale On Sat, 23 Sep 2000, James Newton wrote: {Quote hidden}> The issues that Olin is replying to are not a result of private reply to > settings, but since he has continued to complain about this I need to > address it. > > If you set a private "reply to" address when you post to the PICList, the > list server honors that request and passes the posts on to each member with > the default reply address set to that individual rather than the list. When > replying, that setting can be overridden if you really want to send a reply > to the list. > > If anybody (other than Olin) actually cares about this please let me know > and I'll see if I can change it. > TakeThisOuTjamesnewtonEraseMEspam_OUTpiclist.com?subject=NO_PRIVATE_REPLYS> > RemoveMEjamesnewtonTakeThisOuTpiclist.com?subject=ALLOW_PRIVATE_REPLYS > > I find it hard to believe that anyone could really object so strongly to > allowing another poster (the person to whom one is replying) to specify that > they wish the reply to be sent directly rather than via the list. > > I also find it hard to believe that it is so difficult to just look at the > reply address before you hit send and, if you choose not to honor the > original posters request to reply privately, just change the address to > piclistEraseME.....mitvma.mit.edu. > > Olin, referring to people as assholes on the PICList is not encouraged. > Please calm down. Also, before we get the results of this poll back, think > about this for a second: Are you able to accept the will of the majority (if > not that of the list admins) and let this issue go? If you can't, you need > to learn about "higher powers." I would suggest leaving the list and > attending AA meetings instead. Not that I assume you drink, but it is my > opinion, after 7 years clean and sober, that they have the inside track on > the acceptance of a need for higher powers, religious or social. > > Would you rather have received that message privately? > > James Newton, PICList Admin #3 > EraseMEjamesnewtonpiclist.com > 1-619-652-0593 phone > http://www.piclist.com > > {Original Message removed}

I sort my messages like so: TO or CC contains PICLIST. That way it can only go to my piclist folder if the piclist is/was the origianl recipient of the message. Private messages to my mailbox, unless a copy was sent to the list, go to my main folder. -Adam Marc wrote: > (a pity in the context of this discussion is that many users split the > incoming mail into folders by their subject. If someone writes a special > private response, deliberately or by oversight of Reply-To, it might > be misinterpreted by the recipient just as well - it might end up in > the mailing list folder and be perceived as public posting). -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

Well, after a week, a total of 16 people posted a vote one way or the other, and the results are: ALLOW_PRIVATE_REPLYS: 9 NO_PRIVATE_REPLYS: 7 From this I get two things: A) very few people care about this B) more people would like to see private replies continue to be respected than would not but its pretty much evenly divided. As an admin, I'd like to stamp out every little bit of dissatisfaction on the list, but I don't know how to do that with this issue and I don't think I can justify spending anymore time on it. Please let me know (privately) if you have any suggestions. --- James Newton (PICList Admin #3) RemoveMEjamesnewtonEraseMEEraseMEpiclist.com 1-619-652-0593 PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com or .org {Original Message removed}