Fwd: Re: [INDOLOGY] default reply behaviour (was: curses)

Rosane Rocher rrocher at SAS.UPENN.EDU
Sun Feb 27 19:52:46 UTC 2011

Having lived with both systems, I favor default reply to the list.  It seems
more sensible to me to put the burden of creating an address on individuals who
occasionally wish to send private messages than on all participants to list

Rosane Rocher

----- Forwarded message from Dominik Wujastyk <wujastyk at GMAIL.COM> -----
    Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 20:18:10 +0100
    From: Dominik Wujastyk <wujastyk at GMAIL.COM>
Reply-To: Dominik Wujastyk <wujastyk at GMAIL.COM>
 Subject: Re: [INDOLOGY] default reply behaviour (was: curses)
      To: INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk

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

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?

INDOLOGY committee member

----- End forwarded message -----

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list