[META-LIST] Now: perennial "reply-to-all"

[Michael Monnerie]

On Montag, 16. August 2010 Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> Why does "everyone" on this list "reply-to-all" when 99% of the time
>  it is totally unnecessary, redundant, and potentially ruffles a
>  sender's feathers, as in this case?
 
I'm also on several lists, but the only list where reply-to-all is used 
is this one - so I followed the way it's done here without having 
questioned why.

-- 
mit freundlichen Grüssen,
Michael Monnerie, Ing. BSc

it-management Internet Services
http://proteger.at [gesprochen: Prot-e-schee]
Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31

****** Aktuelles Radiointerview! ******
http://www.it-podcast.at/aktuelle-sendung.html

// Wir haben im Moment zwei Häuser zu verkaufen:
// http://zmi.at/langegg/
// http://zmi.at/haus2009/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/xfs/attachments/20100817/42b3ac51/attachment.sig>