On 2/1/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Nitin Borwankar</b> <<a href="mailto:nitin@borwankar.com">nitin@borwankar.com</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
The Reply-All button is a simple painless solution. Depending on what<br>you want you can reply to sender (Reply) or all (Reply-All) so this is<br>more flexible, no?</blockquote><div><br>It violates one of the underlying principles of email list design back at the beginning: it
<span style="font-style: italic;">increases </span>the amount of data being transmitted by at least 2x, and possibly up to much more, in situations such as this very post which is going to two MLs as well as you directly. It also means you receive at
<span style="font-style: italic;">least </span>two copies and possibly more, which is more than inconvenient, its bloody annoying.<br><br>Most modern email clients have the ability to right-click or equivalent on the sender address (which is always in the headers regardless of Reply-To content), and send a reply straight there. The default method should
<span style="font-style: italic;">definitely </span>not be to sender on a ML like this, where the focus is communicating with the community, not a one-directional flow. That hasn't been the designed case on MLs since the Endless September began.
<br></div></div><br>-- <br>Alexander Williams (<a href="mailto:thantos@gmail.com">thantos@gmail.com</a>)<br>Proprietor of the Squid's Redoubt (<a href="http://chancel.org:8000/Redoubt">http://chancel.org:8000/Redoubt</a>)