OFFTOPIC Re: [Mailman-Users] Archive URL in postings (2.1b3)

Dave Sherohman esper at
Wed Oct 30 21:29:27 CET 2002

On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 02:12:54PM -0600, Kyle Rhorer wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 October 2002 13:44, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> > I have no recollection of any mailing list ever sending me a list of
> > supported MUAs when I subscribed.
> IIRC, he wasn't speaking in the context of mailing lists.  He was 
> speaking in the context of a corporate helpdesk that supports employee 
> or contract customer users.

Which was exactly my point.  Even though it may be appropriate (and
necessary) for Chuq's organization to provide lists of supported software
to their customers, this does not mean that it is appropriate for MLM
developers or list owners to dictate to their users what mail clients
must be used with the list.

> If I understand 
> the discussion that has gone on here, the thinking is that it's time to 
> push the issue a little bit in order to raise the bar.

I agree, so long as the change is for the better, such as the List-*
headers.  I also tend to be quick when it comes to suggesting that
people upgrade to MUAs that support a reply-to-list function (or demand
that their MUA vendor add it).  But rearranging existing headers and
clobbering their original content strikes me as a very, very bad idea.

Was this discussed onlist before being implemented?  If so, does anyone
remember a thread title and approximate time frame so I can look it up in
the archive?  This discussion has focused entirely on why it's bad and I'd
like to see what potential positive points there might be in its favor.

When we reduce our own liberties to stop terrorism, the terrorists
have already won. - reverius

Innocence is no protection when governments go bad. - Tom Swiss

More information about the Mailman-Users mailing list