On Saturday 27 August 2011 09:47, Robert Derman wrote: > Mike Scott wrote: > > On 26/08/2011 00:10, Larry Gusaas wrote: > > .... > > > >> Wrong. The issue was having to search through the headers to > >> find if the poster was subscribed or not. There was no > >> indication in the subject that the poster was not subscribed. > >> This wasted much time for people providing support. > > > > Worse than that even. User Q sends in a query. Subbed user A > > replies, subbed user B follows that up, and C then wants to add > > to the thread to give what he feels is a better response. How on > > earth is C supposed to find out whether the /original/ poster Q > > was subbed or not, to be sure that his response will reach Q? > > Even if he's willing to check the entire thread, he may not have > > kept the original Q and A emails. > > I always thought that the mail list should have been set up so that > you simply COULD NOT post to it if you weren't subscribed!!
The issue with that was the newbies that subscribed to post ended up bleating about all the emails they recieved. See how the whole argument gets circular. I have a possible solution. Two lists: * one for regular subscribers where they ask and recieve help from each other. * the other where newbies get directed to post to. On which everybody does a reply all, or the server REPLY-TO: is set to the poster, not the list. from that i thought of another possibility. Hack the server software so that for all moderated posts the REPLY-TO: header gets automatically set to the OP. That would definately improve the situation. -- Michael -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] For additional commands send email to [email protected] with Subject: help
