[IRPCoalition] FW: Reply-To -setting

Marianne Franklin m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk
Mon Dec 3 11:12:48 EET 2012

Dear Tapani

Thanks for the clarification and links with more discussion on what for 
most is possibly a technical issue only! ;-)

RE. Anriette's point, those of us using Thunderbird do have the added 
advantage of a clear option with the  'reply to list'.

Stand by this week for more about the Steering Committee elections.


On 02/12/2012 10:35, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 02, 2012 at 10:35:39AM +0200, Anriette Esterhuysen (anriette at apc.org) wrote:
>> Interesting - While it is true that most lists are set to 'reply to' the
>> list, I think Taipani's reasoning that people must make a concsious
>> decision to reply to the list is very legitimate. I also think it is
>> good to be exposed to, and respect, different mailing list cultures.
> Yes. There're other "mailing list culture" things, too, like that when
> replying, is it preferable to copy the entire message and write you
> reply above it like you did, or to insert your comments in between
> and trim unnecessary parts, like I'm doing now.
>> In fact, if the settings for the civil society internet governance
>> caucus list (IGC) was set to 'reply to author' itmight actually manage
>> to find the time to read it:)
> :-)
> But it _does_ have the tendency to reduce clutter.
>> As a matter of interest, this does actually not affect me. I use
>> Thunderbird on Ubuntu and have an automatic option (clickable button)
>> in my mail client to 'reply to list'. Don't mostmail clients offer that
>> option these days?
> Most of them probably do, but Microsoft Outlook famously does not.
> The list, however, has been configured so that if you use "Reply to All",
> which sends the reply separately to both list and author and possible
> others Cc:'d, they won't get it twice anyway, if the addresses used
> are same as on the list. (This can be turned off individually if desired.)
> Thus users of Outlook and the like can use "Reply to All" without
> worrying about people getting it twice.
> If somebody is interested in lengthier arguments about it,
> here're two, pro and against:
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
> http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.mhtml

Dr Marianne Franklin
Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
Goldsmiths, University of London
Dept. of Media & Communications
New Cross, London SE14 6NW
Tel: +44 20 7919 7072
<m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>

More information about the IRP mailing list