Snort mailing list archives
RE: Replying conventions
From: Matt Yackley <Matt.Yackley () perkinswill com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 11:05:47 -0500
Why wouldn't you reply to the list...????? Some of the biggest reason for replying to the list: 1. Other people may not need to spend the time to answer a question if they see that it has already been answered. 2. I thought this list was here to "SHARE" information, how does that happen if all replies are sent direct via e-mail. 3. How can you tell someone to read the archives if there isn't any good info in the archives due to everyone replying direct.... :) just my 2 cents Matt -----Original Message----- From: Matt Kettler [mailto:mkettler () evi-inc com] Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 2:23 PM To: snort-users () lists sourceforge net Subject: [Snort-users] Replying conventions 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 ------------------------------------------------------- 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
Current thread:
- Replying conventions Matt Kettler (Aug 21)
- Re: Replying conventions twig les (Aug 21)
- Re: Replying conventions hackerwacker (Aug 21)
- Re: Replying conventions Chris Green (Aug 21)
- Re: Replying conventions Matt Kettler (Aug 21)
- Re: Replying conventions Jason (Aug 21)
- Re: Replying conventions Jon Quiros (Aug 21)
- Re: Replying conventions Matt Kettler (Aug 21)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Replying conventions Matt Yackley (Aug 22)
- Re: Replying conventions John Sage (Aug 22)
- Re: Replying conventions Matt Kettler (Aug 22)
- Re: Replying conventions John Sage (Aug 22)
- Re: Replying conventions Eric Joe (Aug 22)
- Re: Replying conventions Matt Kettler (Aug 22)
- Re: Replying conventions (hopefully the last one) Keith Young (Aug 22)
- Snort, php, MySQL and acid showing no activity Joshua Rogers (Aug 22)
- Re: Replying conventions Matt Kettler (Aug 22)
