Glenn Maynard wrote on 07/03/2006 01:05: > It is your job to set MFT if you want my mailer to treat you differently > than everyone else, such as if you want to receive CCs on list posts. Why? MFT isn't an accepted standard. It also isn't implemented in too many MUAs (mozilla/thunderbird just being one example) because it wasn't accepted as a standard. So why on earth should I manually set that header (and in the thunderbird case, I can't even do so without major patching and tweaking)? I don't say that the idea behind MFT is a bad idea (actually, many aspects of it _do_ make sense), but until it is accepted as a standard, it is (IMHO) stupid to ask people to tweak their MUAs to set and handle it. > If you don't, and instead just say "CC me on replies" in the message, > you're pushing the work to handle your exceptional case onto everyone else > on the list, which is unacceptable. That's why, as I said, I only comply > with such requests once, to point people to MFT (at least, unless I really > want to talk to that person). Why do you expect people to support a non-standard header? Actually you are even trying to force them so use it (even if you possibly don't do so intentionally). That's - again - stupid IMHO. > (Of course, I have no problem with doing both--setting the header and > asking for it in English for those whose mailers don't support it.) So you expect people to set it, even if their mailers don't support it, but you accept that you might need to ask for your prefered handling of replies explicitly because their mailers don't support it? Talk about inconsistencies ;-) cu, sven
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature