Private vs. public responses

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Private vs. public responses

Thomas.Schneider.Wien
  I do peronally have the feeling, that the *reply* features of those
both lists should be improved.

I some-times want to reply *only to the sender*, and send a *cc*
to the group.

Would it be too difficult to implement this feature ?

Currently, even a *sender* is shown, *my reply* goes to the whole list!

Is this still the state of the art?

Thomas Schneider (Tom.) from Vienna, Austria.

PS: I'm sending this mail intentionally to both lists  ...   ;-)

--
Thomas Schneider Projects ReyC & LOGOS on www.KENAI.com
_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

Tom. (ths@db-123.com)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RexxLA] Private vs. public responses

Thomas.Schneider.Wien
  *NO*, dear friend Les:

If someone asks me something  (on the list), or I am interested to
discuss something with the *sender* (cc REXXLA, maybe), my *answer* is
always
*forced* to the whole list ...

You see ?
Thomas.

PS: Chip, and all there:

*Last time* I will double post my answer ...

Let's use REXXLA to discuss this further (when you like).
Tom.
==============================================================


Am 16.10.2010 23:31, schrieb Les Koehler:

> See below.
> Les
>
> Thomas Schneider wrote:
>>    I do peronally have the feeling, that the *reply* features of those
>> both lists should be improved.
>>
>> I some-times want to reply *only to the sender*, and send a *cc*
>> to the group.
>>
> That would be pointless! You achieve the same thing by just sending to the list.
>
>> Would it be too difficult to implement this feature ?
>>
>> Currently, even a *sender* is shown, *my reply* goes to the whole list!
>>
> Of course the *sender* is shown. Otherwise how would responders know who they
> were responding to and how to answer in a way that was meaningful? I'm sure that
> Rick, Rony and Michael (etc.) respond to knowledgeable object programmers a
> *lot* differently than they do to me! What's more, I really *appreciate* the
> extra hand-holding that they provide.
>> Is this still the state of the art?
>>
> As far as I know, yes it is. The presumption is that the user has set things up
> on their email client (Outlook, Thunderbird, etc.) so they can efficiently
> handle their email. I presume that most email clients do what Thunderbird does:
> provide configurable filters to direct email to specific folders. That way the
> user knows whether they are handling list email or private email. If you set a
> filter improperly and respond inappropriately (yes, I've done it!) then you fix
> the filter definition!
>
>> Thomas Schneider (Tom.) from Vienna, Austria.
>>
>> PS: I'm sending this mail intentionally to both lists  ...   ;-)
>>
> _______________________________________________
> rexxla-members mailing list -- mailto:[hidden email]
> http://rice.safedataisp.net/mailman/listinfo/rexxla-members
>


--
Thomas Schneider Projects ReyC & LOGOS on www.KENAI.com
_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

Tom. (ths@db-123.com)
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Private vs. public responses

Fernando Cassia-2
In reply to this post by Thomas.Schneider.Wien
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Thomas Schneider <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  I do peronally have the feeling, that the *reply* features of those
> both lists should be improved.
>
> I some-times want to reply *only to the sender*, and send a *cc*
> to the group.
>
> Would it be too difficult to implement this feature ?

Just some food for thought. Earlier this year, Oracle decided to close
the "[hidden email]". Some very wise manager up on
the decision making chain decided that only virtualbox-developers was
needed, and they needed to "cut down resources".

A big mass hysteria developed with users claiming "it´s the end of the
world" and "we´re doomed" or variations of the two. One of my
remaining brain cells awakened and I asked "hey, what´s the difference
if we set up a ´virtualbox-users´ list on Sourceforge.net?" So I did.
Then I announced on the old list that if everyone wanted to continue
"business as  usual" we should all move to the sourceforge list. 90%
did.  And life goes on. The s^^^^^d manager got his way, and "we" the
virtualbox users community had our way as well.

So, the moral of the story here is: if the IBM netrexx page ever goes
away, along with this list, we´d do just fine with a mailing list
hosted for free on SourceForge.net, which uses the proven Mailman back
end (I´m a big fan of sourceforge.net, even while everyone and his
mother is now talking about "Google Code" which, imho, sucks, as it
leaves you with no traditional style mailing list, and people are told
to create a "google group" (and I hate its web interface).

Second moral of the story *newer* and *dumbed-down web interface* is
not always *better*.

FC

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]