[R-390] Subject: Off list posts

[Dan Ferguson]

But does not setting the list to have replies go to the list invite one to
think for himself at least as much as setting it the other way?

I wrote the following earlier this afternoon, and left it in the "drafts"
folder while I went out to pick up a batch of boat anchor stuff from a
fellow's garage. (Unfortunately, no R390s!)  Guess I'll send it now.

********
Yes, it certainly is a significant issue.  It is clear that in lists set up
to reply to the sender, rather than to the list, a lot of the content that
should go to the list gets lost, and the value of the list is thereby
considerably diminished.  If, as a list member replying to a list message, I
want my reply to go only to the sender, it is my responsibility to see that
that happens.  If I  fail to do that and am thereby embarrassed, so be it! I
run several lists myself (including SWLtalk, AR7030 and VOACAP on QTH), all
set up to reply to the list.  Content is not lost and complaints about the
setup are rare.

I subscribe to enough lists that I get several hundred emails each day from
the lists, in addition to other email.  Most of those lists are set to have
replies go to the list.  On the few that have replies go only to the sender,
one can almost always find threads disappearing when clearly not finished,
or becoming discontinuous when someone realizes the list has not been
getting replies and adds the list back in.

It just works better if a "mail reflector" really "reflects".



Dan
----- Original Message -----
From: <Llgpt@aol.com>
To: <dlwade@pacbell.net>; <gharmon@idworld.net>
Cc: <ham@cq.nu>; <r-390@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 18:19
Subject: Re: [R-390] Subject: Off list posts


> Let's leave it up to the individual guys, we don't need a mind control
> moderator/nazi......
>
> We need to think for ourselves, or we might be in trouble.
>
> Les Locklear
>
>
> In a message dated 12/29/02 4:58:11 PM, dlwade@pacbell.net writes:
>
> << Gary,
>
>           Thanks for your thoughts, Gary.  You bring up an important
> point and is exactly why I, and I think Bob as well, would like to
> see the default changed.
>
>        You wrote, in part:
>
> >...Most of the lists have archive capability so it is a simple
> matter to review the entire thread if you are interested.
> <end quote>
>
>         You are correct:  most lists do archive posts and also have
> search engines which range from pathetic to not bad in quality.
> However, and this is important, they don't archive posts not sent to
> the list!  As an example, had we been discussing some technically
> relevant topic, your note sent directly to me would not be available
> to any list member, past, present or future because, since it was not
> sent to the list,  it would not have been archived at all.  This is
> exactly my point and I believe Bob's as well.  A forum such as this
> with a wide range of technical expertise has much of its value in its
> ability to share that information with all its members.  It would
> seem an easy task to simply use the delete key for those posts that
> should not have been sent to the broad audience.
>
>         I don't know about past discussions or any consensus reached.
>  All I know is I didn't participate in those discussions (probably
> because they didn't post to the list) and I did not participate in
> that consensus.  So, I'm posting this to the list as a whole in the
> interest of reaching a broad consensus, even at the risk of wandering
> off topic.
>
>                Happy Holidays!
>
>                    Dennis
>
> > Dennis,
> >
> > This topic has been discussed many times and the general consensus is
> > that REPLY TO SENDER is the preferred method.  Most of the lists have
> > archive capability so it is a simple matter to review the entire
> > thread if you are interested.  My experience is that it's a simple
> > matter to manually RETURN TO ALL instead of making it the default.
> > I've seen discussions of offers, prices, complaints, etc., sent to the
> > list if the default is ALL.  I only know of one list that
> > automatically goes to ALL and I've personally relied to the sender
> > through the list when that is what I didn't mean to do.
> >
> > 73, gary
> >
> > =======================
> > Gary H. Harmon, Jr. / K5JWK
> > 6302 Robin Forest
> > San Antonio, TX 78239-3218
> > (210) 657-1549 <home>
> > (210) 884-6926 <cellular>
> > gharmon@idworld.net
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: r-390-admin@mailman.qth.net [mailto:r-390-admin@mailman.qth.net]
> > On Behalf Of Dennis L. Wade Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 12:10 PM
> > To: r-390@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [R-390] Subject: Off list posts
> >
> > Bob Camp wrote, in part:
> >
> > >
> > > There are a lot of off list posts that go on and I still wonder if
> > > this is a significant issue. Then again it may only be me ....
> > >
> > >     Enjoy!
> > >
> > >         Bob Camp
> > >         KB8TQ
> >
> >
> > Well, for what its worth, its at least me and Bob.
> >
> > I would much rather see posts mistakenly sent to the list than never
> > see posts that would be useful to a broader audience.  It should be a
> > simple matter to change the list default reply-to field to show the
> > list address rather than the poster's address.  My sense is that the
> > impact on list volume would be small.
> >
> >          Happy Holidays to All!
> >
> >               Dennis
> >
> >    -----------------
> > "If you can remain calm, you just don't have all the facts"
> >
> > Dennis Wade
> > KG6ZI
> > Carmichael, CA
> >
>
> -----------------
> "If you can remain calm, you just don't have all the facts"
>
> Dennis Wade
> KG6ZI
> Carmichael, CA
>  >>
>