Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

crossposts etc

Expand Messages
  • wahowland@aol.com
    ... I am getting very frustrated with the phiolospophy that replies should always be set to the list address. It is causing me a great deal of headache and
    Message 1 of 3 , Jan 3, 2004
      >>>>>>
      I am getting very frustrated with the phiolospophy that replies
      should always be set to the list address. It is causing me a great
      deal of headache and personal distress, because it's making me look
      bad, not to mention causing al of you folks problems.
      >>>>>
      Hi Chuck,
      I have absolutely no clue why this happens. I just thought you were
      crossposting to all three lists. I'd suggest you send an email copied to all of the
      three listowners and see if any of them has a solution.
      Once upon a time I knew a guy who routinely copied posts off of Scouts-L and
      posted them on his own site implying that he had received them as personal
      communications from the original posters, but I don't think he does that anymore.
      I actually don't know, because when I called him on it he cut me off his
      mailing list <G>, but I get Scouts-L anyway so it's not a huge hole in my life
      <G>.
      Me, I don't even know how to crosspost, unless it's by manually adding
      multiple addresses to each email <G>.
      Hope someone can solve your dilemma, though <G> Happy New Year!
      YiS
      AB
    • Wendell Brown
      ... IMHO, the philosophy of whether a reply goes to the list or the sender is pretty basic. It comes down to is the definition of the list -- it s either a
      Message 2 of 3 , Jan 3, 2004
        > I am getting very frustrated with the phiolospophy that replies
        > should always be set to the list address. It is causing me a great
        > deal of headache and personal distress, because it's making me look
        > bad, not to mention causing al of you folks problems.

        IMHO, the philosophy of whether a reply goes to the list or the sender
        is pretty basic. It comes down to is the definition of the list -- it's
        either a discussion group or an announcement list. Scouter_t is a
        discussion group, so the replies by default go to the group (hence
        everyone can benefit from them).

        Most people that have problems with this type of list are actually
        having problems using their email package. The e-mail package I have
        used for years pops up a box and lets me choose if the from is not the
        reply too! Outcrook and many other packages don't offer this level of
        capability so the user has to figure out how to correctly pick who they
        reply to -- for instance in Outlook by default the replies go to the
        list, but to reply to just the sender requires selecting "Reply All" and
        then deleting everyone that the reply doesn't need to go.
      • Scouter Chuck
        Wendell wrote... ... To a point. I know what you re saying, but I see things a bit differently. ... And normally, this would happen. However, there are more
        Message 3 of 3 , Jan 4, 2004
          Wendell wrote...

          > IMHO, the philosophy of whether a reply goes to the list or the sender
          > is pretty basic. It comes down to is the definition of the list -- it's
          > either a discussion group or an announcement list.

          To a point. I know what you're saying, but I see things a bit
          differently.

          > Scouter_t is a discussion group, so the replies by default
          > go to the group (hence everyone can benefit from them).

          And normally, this would happen. However, there are more than
          a few time across the 5 lists where I have this problem, where
          I have needed to make a personal reply to the poster -- either
          to pass on something that was not postable to the list address,
          or to pass them basic or esoteric information that would help
          them, but either wasn't necessary to tell everyone on the list.

          Setting the "Reply to" option to be poster may not have the effect
          that you think, although most of the list member may have a bit
          of trouble with in, initially.

          > Most people that have problems with this type of list are actually
          > having problems using their email package.

          I use Cox webmail. I am reasonabley sure that I can't fix the
          problems there.

          > The e-mail package I have used for years pops up a box and
          > lets me choose if the from is not the reply too!
          > Outcrook and many other packages don't offer this level of
          > capability so the user has to figure out how to correctly
          pick
          > who they reply to -- for instance in Outlook by default the
          > replies go to the list, but to reply to just the sender requires
          > selecting "Reply All" and then deleting everyone that the reply
          > doesn't need to go.

          Or, in my case, after I have selected "reply", copying the poster's
          address from the "From" field and pasting it into the "to" field
          manually. Reply and Reply All both display the list address
          with no others.

          So, I do that and just as I finish the post, Cox informs me that I
          have been logged off the email program for non-use. (Writing
          a post in the on-line editor is not doing anything on-line.)
          So I set up the reply again, and paste the reply back in, and
          have just lost the address I want to reply to.

          That's why I said I just don't bother to do anything a lot anymore.

          Yes, it would be a lot easier to use Eudora on my PC and not
          try to use webmail. However, with webmail, if I forward a virus
          to someone, it came from server to server, and my PC didn't have
          a hoot to do with it.

          YiS,

          Chuck
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.