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

[Stan Hoeppner]

Christoph Hellwig put forth on 8/17/2010 4:01 AM:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 07:32:02AM +0200, Michael Monnerie wrote:
>> 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.
> 
> It's done by all Lists in the Linux development universe, and it's the
> only sane way to handle a list.  We don't require people to subsribe to
> post to the list, and keeping everyone in the To/Cc list means it
> arrives at those people as well.  In addition it allows subscribes that
> are on tons of lists to prioritize discussions they're actually involved
> in personally by getting a copy in the inbox that can be replied to ASAP
> while also having an archived copy in the list folder.  Every other way
> to run a list is simply insane.

Thanks Christoph.  That makes sense.

-- 
Stan