Sender: rmh AT interlaced DOT net To: opendos AT mail DOT tacoma DOT net Subject: Re: [opendos] Reply-to fields References: <1630 DOT 9703172315 AT pulteney DOT dcs DOT st-andrews DOT ac DOT uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.105) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Richard Hoskins Date: 17 Mar 1997 22:23:21 -0500 In-Reply-To: dg@dcs.st-and.ac.uk's message of Mon, 17 Mar 97 23:15:49 +0000 Message-ID: Lines: 44 dg AT dcs DOT st-and DOT ac DOT uk writes: > [...] > >Then how would you easily reply to *just* the author? We should > >*discourage* replies to this list. > > Look at the `From:' line at the top and fill it in manually. > Why can't the people with the broken mail readers do this? > >What sort of toy mail clients are you using? > > exmh & mh. mh is the most powerful mail reader ever written. You > should know, you use Emacs. non sequitur. > Really, though, we should shift the whole thing to a > newsgroup. Mailing lists weren't *designed* for this sort of > volume. I think the volume is in part due to the recent OpenDOS release. Give it a year. If the volume is still this high, I'll agree with you. As it stands now, I'd argue against it in the discussion phase and vote `NO' in the voting. (If it got that far.) Newsgroups are a lot easier to start than they are to stop. (Witness comp.sources.*, comp.lang.perl, etc.) Prudence dictates a list demonstrate a *sustained* interest. In the meanwhile, if some folks are finding their software inadequate... well, they know what they can do. > but lets not start a my-mail-reader-is-bigger-than-YOUR-mail-reader > argument, shall we? PID PPID PRI NI SIZE RSS STA TTY TIME COMMAND 7845 3619 1 0 11184 9108 S 2 0:17 emacs You should see it when it gets older. :) -- I just forgot my whole philosophy of life!!!