Subject:
|
Re: Allow posting & FUT to member email
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.suggestions
|
Date:
|
Tue, 9 Apr 2002 03:40:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2199 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, William R. Ward writes:
> William R Ward <bill@wards.net> writes:
> > The standard NNTP behavior is to set "Followup-To: poster" in the
> > header.
> >
> > I'm doing that on this message, let's see if it works.
>
> Looks like it works just fine (I overrode the followup-to rule in
> order to post this message). If you try to reply to the above message
> in NNTP it sends e-mail. Does it do the same for web and SMTP users?
>
> If so, we've got our answer - put it in the FAQ and call this one
> done.
Strongly disagree. As I said offline (and that's annoying in and of itself,
having to say things twice because of an not easily overrideable FUT), this
breaks threading. Since from the web there is no easy way to override the
FUT without starting a new post or anchoring somewhere else, it changes a
suggestion of where one ought to FUT to into a mandate that cannot be
circumvented.
Anything that breaks threading is bad... c.f. the flogging Ben Whytecross
got because his mail program was deranged and broke threads.
If there were to be any FAQ entry at all on this, my vote would be that this
technique *not* be used as it breaks things.
FUTs are, at the root, suggestions, not mandates. Proper ettiquette suggests
careful use of them, yes, but it is rude to prevent the responder from
setting FUT as he sees fit if he has good reason for doing so.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Allow posting & FUT to member email
|
| (...) I agree completely. But that's not the issue that started all this. The request was, as the subject says, to "allow posting & FUT to member email". This issue is solved by the use of "Followup-To: poster". However, a *new* issue has arisen as (...) (23 years ago, 9-Apr-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
| | | Re: Allow posting & FUT to member email
|
| (...) What is it with Seppo's, the english language, and vowels...sometimes they drop them, and in other cases they pop up where you least expect them [it's Whytcross, not Whytecross !] Anyway...the e-mail program was: 1) not mine, but one run by (...) (23 years ago, 9-Apr-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Allow posting & FUT to member email
|
| (...) Looks like it works just fine (I overrode the followup-to rule in order to post this message). If you try to reply to the above message in NNTP it sends e-mail. Does it do the same for web and SMTP users? If so, we've got our answer - put it (...) (23 years ago, 9-Apr-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
36 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
