[Fwd: Re: [plug] Reply-to headers]

Christian christian at amnet.net.au
Thu Aug 10 15:00:14 WST 2000


On Thu, Aug 10, 2000 at 02:41:52PM +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
 > 
 > problem is not the list itself but people setting their reply-to headers
> > for odd reasons.  The major agitator this time (as is common) seems to
> > be Bret (one T)
> 
> >From what I understand, the main agitator is not me; I am just one of a
> few voices (I keep hearing these voices...), who thinks it could be
> otherwise.

Really?  And do these other voices have names?  Are they in the room
with us now...? *cough*


Seriously though, every time this issue comes up you seem to be the main
antagonist.  Maybe I'm just not paying enough attention.

 
> This is what I mentioned, in a previous posting, it is the wonderful (as
> in I wonder why it does it) Netscape, changing its settings, when it
> crashes (I think it happens when it crashes; it crashes so often, I am
> not sure what is going on with it).

So it's Netscape's fault, not the list.  Otherwise, maybe it's the
voices...
 
> >From what I understand, there are filters, to divert, or, "can", emails
> in which a person is not interested; procmail is, I believe, one, that
> has been mentioned, for people to use on my emails, when people disagree
> with my opinions. If you are as sick of the thread, as you appear to be,
> then, surely, you are capable, of applying such a filter?

Wouldn't it be better than, rather than everyone contuinually
maintaining filters every time a new thread comes up that is stupid for
the stupid threads to be killed?  This is a stupid thread, it should be
killed.

> However, a point to remember, Christian, is that discussion can benefit
> all involved; for people like Matt, it can let them know what people
> think, and, maybe, find what shortcomings people have in their
> knowledge, so they can help overcome the shortcomings, and, for people
> who are willing to learn, and, who are lacking in some particular
> knowledge, it can resolve those shortcomings. Overall, it can be a
> learning experience, as long as it does not become derogatory.

Part of my point is that no one appears to be learning.  This was amply
demonstrated when a recent poster said "I vote that the reply go to the
list."

BTW, are you at all familiar with the grammatical abberation known as a
"run-on sentence"?  Or is the full stop key on your keyboard broken?

> I thought that one purpose of mailing lists like these, was so that
> people could learn how to configure things like mail applications, mail
> servers, etc...

What question do you have about configuring your mail client then?  Ask
it and stop all the nonsense about modifying the list's (correct)
behaviour.

 



More information about the plug mailing list