Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 18:54:22 -0400 From: Alejandro Imass <ait@p2ee.org> To: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rox-fm Message-ID: <BANLkTimpvEZ%2BOK12xSzXZCqx0ozngUn%2BUg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikTb0Ckbc7FM_Ka2WZa22TvVdbsZA@mail.gmail.com> References: <4DC1BEA8.6030108@gmail.com> <20110504224931.9ffd5682.dcdowse@gmx.net> <4DC1E23E.3020001@gmail.com> <20110505014556.50dcea0e.dcdowse@gmx.net> <BANLkTi=Csvs%2B3C7-XJGUDn43Jzf-JNZZ4g@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTikTb0Ckbc7FM_Ka2WZa22TvVdbsZA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 4:35 PM, David Brodbeck <gull@gull.us> wrote: > On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 7:50 PM, Alejandro Imass <ait@p2ee.org> wrote: >> I wish someone could clearly explain why the reply-to field should >> ONLY have the mailing-list address, or at least have as the default >> address and not the other way around as it is here! > > This is one of the all-time great religious wars of the internet, on > par with vi vs. Emacs and top-posting vs. bottom-posting. > > See http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/reply-to-harmful.html for one > side of the argument, and > http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.html for the other side. > Man, that's hilarious! Using the same rhetoric but backwards! Very cool read... and I was even kinda shy to ask, I mean so many years on lists and I'd thought I had heard something on this respect but never imagined it was actually a religious point. Thanks again, -- Alejandro
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BANLkTimpvEZ%2BOK12xSzXZCqx0ozngUn%2BUg>