I tend to think that the minuses of "firstname.lastname@example.org" being the respondent
of replied messages far outweigh the plusses. Take, for example, the very
timely instance where one of us goes out of town and sets his mail program
to automatically respond to all incomming mail messages . . .(which I think
is a good idea to do). With about 1000 of us on the list, I would be
surprised if the number of automatically returned messages stays as low as it
Also, I'm sure that we will see a lot more instances of people replying to
the entire list when their message was intended for the sender only.
On Jun 21, 9:13am, Ian Gibson wrote:
> The minus is I can no longer hit the reply button to send just to the
> sender. Something of a waste of bandwidth and I have to think a little more
> about the validity of my 'global' comments. Ive upset enough people as it is
> over the years - I dont want a system that makes that even easier.
> It is also much more of a problem to find out who the sender actually is.
>-- End of excerpt from Ian Gibson
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Benjamin N. Dunn tel: (612) 937-3000 Applications Engineer : (612) 906-2220 direct Business Development FAX: (612) 937-0070 Stratasys, Inc. e-mail: email@example.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:37:25 EEST