AW: [INDOLOGY] default reply behaviour (was: curses)

Valerie J Roebuck vjroebuck at BTINTERNET.COM
Mon Feb 28 02:20:41 EST 2011


Yes, but all the other Lists use the other method, so I practically never remember. 

Valerie J Roebuck

On 27 Feb 2011, at 20:33, Kellner, Birgit wrote:

> The process (hit "reply all" to reply to the list, then remove individual sender from "to"-field) is simple enough, in my opinion, and having fewer list-members embarrassing themselves and others is a great advantage!
> 
> Best, 
> 
> Birgit Kellner
> ________________________________________
> Von: Indology [INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk] im Auftrag von Dominik Wujastyk [wujastyk at GMAIL.COM]
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 27. Februar 2011 20:18
> An: INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk
> Betreff: Re: [INDOLOGY] default reply behaviour (was: curses)
> 
> On 26 February 2011 22:18, Sudalaimuthu Palaniappan <palaniappa at aol.com>wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Just now I realized that with the current default reply in the list going
>> to the original poster, the following response I had sent a few days ago did
>> not go to the list.
>> 
> 
> Can we review this?  It's a change that was made in the default behaviour of
> the INDOLOGY list, by popular request last year.  It annoys me a lot, but,
> unlike Muammar al-Gaddafi, I'm perfectly willing to abide by the will of the
> majority.
> 
> The problem we were trying to solve was private replies to colleagues on the
> list that inadvertently became public.  Perhaps that is a greater danger
> than the annoyance of posts not going to the list at all.
> 
> How do others feel?  Reply to sender, or reply to list at large?
> 
> Best,
> Dominik
> INDOLOGY committee member



More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list