 | | Re: Lugnet.robotics and the Robotics List
|
|
(...) I think I suggested earlier -- if not, I meant to :) -- that the list could be gatewayed to a subgroup, like lugnet.robotics.mailing-list or lugnet.lists.lego-robotics. This makes the seperation more conscious. There's pros and cons to both (...) (26 years ago, 16-Dec-98, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet.robotics and the Robotics List
|
|
Matthew Miller wrote in message ... (...) This is a possibility that would provide at least one group with a semi-guaranteed semblance of order, but it does not address the problem still existing on the mail list, and thus the proposed (...) (26 years ago, 16-Dec-98, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet.robotics and the Robotics List
|
|
Linc Smith wrote in message ... (...) list (...) I read via the mailing list instead of via lugnet for a couple of reasons: 1) My email comes in via IMAP, where my news doesn't. IMAP keeps my read/unread status on the server, which means that I can (...) (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet.robotics and the Robotics List
|
|
(...) Hmm, perhaps in the case of gatewayed messages going out (i.e., gatewayed out of the lugnet.robotics newsgroup into the lego-robotics mailing list, or out of the lugnet.loc.us.ca.sf newsgroup into the ba-lego mailing list), the Reply-To field (...) (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet.robotics and the Robotics List
|
|
Todd Lehman wrote in message <36794b80.31897794@l...et.com>... (...) I'd have to experiment and see what happens if a user does a reply to all in that case. If it sends to the people in the Reply-To header as well as the To header then it would work (...) (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Lugnet.robotics and the Robotics List
|
|
Alex Wetmore wrote in message (...) So, I understand that: You _do_ use Lugnet news groups, but you subscribe to the mail list because you are more interested in the robotics group (higher priority) and you would rather it came to you through email. (...) (26 years ago, 17-Dec-98, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
