Replying conventions

[Matt Kettler <mkettler () evi-inc com>]

This morning I got some all-caps flame mail in reply to one of my list 
postings. The posting in question was one in which I replied to: the 
author, and the list. The Canadian complainer wasn't on the to: or cc: of 
the email complained about, so I can only presume he was complaining 
because the To: line didn't start with snort-users () sourceforge net.

As far as I can tell, replying to the author, and to: the list, or replying 
to: the author and cc: the list is pretty common in snort users. Anyone 
have any explanation as to why someone might object that I replied to the 
author as well as the list, when they were not the author?

The only reason I can see that this would bother a bystanding list 
subscriber is if they have a pretty lame MUA which can't handle filtering 
mail into separate mailboxes when there's multiple recipients in the to: 
line. And that's a pretty lame complaint IMO. Anyone got any valid gripes 
against this practice?


The complaint I got consisted of:

PLEASE POST TO THE LIST ONLY!


I asked:
        Erm, what the heck is your problem?

and got back:
        You must be really dense!

Followed by a subsequent email asking for a more in depth explanation of 
their problem being 553'ed

I chalk it up to mostly being some dimbulb who has a bug up his hind end 
about the way everyone else in the world doesn't do things his way, but it 
did pique my curiosity.







-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old
cell phone?  Get a new here for FREE!
https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390
_______________________________________________
Snort-users mailing list
Snort-users () lists sourceforge net
Go to this URL to change user options or unsubscribe:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/snort-users
Snort-users list archive:
http://www.geocrawler.com/redir-sf.php3?list=snort-users