Date: Thu, 6 Oct 1994 11:59:40 -0400 From: Undetermined origin c/o Postmaster Subject: (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #5) id m0qsvEq-0007WpC; Thu, 6 Oct 94 10:00 MDT Received: by (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03) id AA95703; Thu, 6 Oct 1994 09:36:58 -0600 Date: Thu, 6 Oct 1994 09:33:02 -700 (MDT) From: Warren Keith Russell Subject: Re: replying to individuals To: American Dialect Society In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 6 Oct 1994, Natalie Maynor wrote: > > > I've been wondering. On other lists I'm on, it's customary to reply to > > > individuals for some topics; here, messages addressed to individuals > > > keep getting forwarded to the whole list (eg, about a dozen replies to > > > Luanne v.m.'s request for assistance/informants > > > . Is this customary? or are people just unaware of it? > > You must be on some unusual lists. This list seems fairly typical to me > in that some people do reply to the individual (e.g., I replied to Luanne > directly, as I'm sure many other people did) and some people reply to the > whole list because they don't notice the 'reply-to' line in the headers > and think they're replying to the individual, or they realize that this > is a low-traffic list and that most of us don't mind seeing their replies, > or they're too lazy to readdress. > I have seen this "rule" most often implemented in Usenet newsgroups, where messages/articles are stored for a period of time on the server, and individual messages have a real tendency to clog things up. Once the original poster has had her question answered, she cannot simply delete the message, as she can with a mailing-list message. In Usenet group, private postings to the groups can generate an amazing number of flames. *********************************************************************** Keith Russell Personal Messages: KeithR[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE] wkr[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE] MagicSpelr[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]