JC Lawrence wrote,
| The reasons listed of which the above is one, were, as stated in
| the original message the responses from querying one of my list
| memberships. I'm a reporter in this aspect.
My apologies. I understood that on first reading, but by the time I got to
replying it had slipped my mind. So the views expressed therein were some
from members, not from JC. Sorry for thinking, much less posting, otherwise.
| One explanation as a supporting argument was (slightly paraphrased to
| protect the guilty and privacy):
| "If he really wants it private he can edit the To: header. I want
| people to have to make an extra and special effort to move threads
| off list. I want a barrier to exit for posts on the list."
| Another argument centered around my phrasing of the list as
| "occuring in my living room" (paraphrased again):
| "If we're all in your living room we can all hear each other. If
| you want to say something privatly you get up and go outside
| which means you get up and move your sorry arse. Editing the To:
| header is that same extra effort."
Both of those say, "RTL discourages replying off-list." Well, no kidding.
But "RTS encourages replying off-list" is not equivalent and is not true.
Declining to discourage an act is very different from encouraging it. (In
fact, "RTL encourages replying on-list" isn't accurate either, because nei-
ther setup particularly encourages replying: it still takes more effort to
send a response than not to. "RTL encourages those who reply to do so on-
list rather than off" is true.)
| They viewed RTS as __encouraging__ off-list traffic due to the ease of
| doing a Reply versus a ReplyToAll ...
Well, they're wrong. RTL discourages off-list traffic, yes. That's incon-
trovertible. (It still leaves open the question of whether such discourage-
ment is good or bad.) But "RTS encourages off-list traffic" is not the same.
Besides, how is reply easier than reply-to-all? In Elm I press g or r; no
difference in difficulty. In Outlook Express I click on one icon or the one
next to it; again, the two are equally easy. Show me a list where the ma-
jority of members use a client where reply-to-all is more difficult than
| Admittedly its not an active "encouragment" -- there's no arm twisting
| going on.
Encouragement does not require force, but it does require some promoting
action. Passively declining to discourage it doesn't qualify.
| But then making something "easier" can be viewed as "encouraging it".
If that's their point, they should say "condone," not "encourage." Huge
difference. Besides, RTS doesn't make one easier than the other; it is RTL
that makes one harder than the other. It's doubly misrepresentative to say
it the way they did.