I find deleting to be slightly easier than copy & paste in order to
include the original sender. Further, what difference does it make to you
how many copies the original sender receives? If I happen to receive two
copies of a response to me, I delete one - actually I delete both once I'm
done with it.
this requires having to delete the extraneous e-addresses ;-)
Time is not the issue. The issue is, what does the RFC say? RFC's
determine how things work, and how things will operate together. The
primary problem as I now see it, is that there is apparently no companion
RFC (or at least nobody has mentioned it) that specifies that email clients
need to include a "Reply to List" button. That's an oversight. Someone
with the skill and knowledge to amend RFC's needs to make that correction
so that the next versions of all email clients include the button.
Therefore, I'd like to know what is the time savings in this vs.
having the reply go to the list ???
That's something I agree with, is one of my pet peeves and you've stated
the case perfectly.
This change isn't anymore logical than some of these responders
must think we should re-read the old message before finally seeing
new message has been added - and their addition becomes almost lost
the talk unless enough blank lines have been left; logically, the new
message should be where you can read it first - then if you need to
re-fresh your memory, scroll down to see what preceded it.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Steve Edmonds
I think the safe response when using the changed list settings is use
Reply-all. For simplicity, the only instruction to users of the lists
works consistently is Reply-all.
On 2012-08-16 05:22, Jay Lozier wrote:
On 08/15/2012 12:09 PM, Dan Hall wrote:
In Outlook 2003 SP3 - Reply = Jay Lozier <email@example.com> and
Reply to All = Jay Lozier <firstname.lastname@example.org>;users@**
There is no Reply to List in Outlook.
My reply options changed to "reply all" not "reply list" in Thunderbird
when I received your email. The to field is your email and the cc is
It appears there is some inconsistent behavior with email clients and
webmail sites depending on how they receive the email
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy