Question
mail header alert: they've changed again
HEADS UP! Mail Headers have been changed! I do not think they are back to
the way they were before (but I could be wrong). I replied to Caroline's
email yesterday, but did not pay attention to the headers and accidentally
sent the reply JUST to her.
Now the default reply-to is the sender, not the list. Frankly, I prefer the
reply-to, on mailing lists, to be to the list, although I do like to be
able to discern and reply-to the original sender only/instead because
sometimes should just be off-list. By defaulting to reply-to original
sender, we are going to see a lot of helpful information not shared with
the group until we all remember to change the reply-to to be to or at least
include the list.
So, if you get a reply off-list that would benefit the group (immediately
or in the future), take the time to reply-to the entire list (unless you
think maybe the sender intended it to be private) sharing helpful
information.
On the other hand, we are less likely to see the accidental note to the
list that a replier intended for one person alone. Which, you know, can
sometimes be embarrassing.
--
Paul Nagai
the way they were before (but I could be wrong). I replied to Caroline's
email yesterday, but did not pay attention to the headers and accidentally
sent the reply JUST to her.
Now the default reply-to is the sender, not the list. Frankly, I prefer the
reply-to, on mailing lists, to be to the list, although I do like to be
able to discern and reply-to the original sender only/instead because
sometimes should just be off-list. By defaulting to reply-to original
sender, we are going to see a lot of helpful information not shared with
the group until we all remember to change the reply-to to be to or at least
include the list.
So, if you get a reply off-list that would benefit the group (immediately
or in the future), take the time to reply-to the entire list (unless you
think maybe the sender intended it to be private) sharing helpful
information.
On the other hand, we are less likely to see the accidental note to the
list that a replier intended for one person alone. Which, you know, can
sometimes be embarrassing.
--
Paul Nagai