Re: Handling email

From: Barbara Simons <simons_at_acm_dot_org>
Date: Thu Nov 04 2004 - 17:50:39 CST

Of course this is not my list. But if it's going to continue to be
reply-to-all, then I must regretfully request to have my name removed from
the list. I have obtained some valuable information from a few postings,
but far too many of the postings I find to be of little or no interest.
Since I am already overwhelmed with email, I don't have the time to deal
with a large number of emails that have little relevance to issues of
concern to me.

In my opinion emails lists that generate a minimum amount of traffic are the
most effective ones, since people are far more likely to read postings if
they are not too numerous. But, as I said, this is obviously not my call.

Regards,
Barbara

On 11/4/04 11:59, "Alan Dechert" <alan@openvotingconsortium.org> wrote:

> Barbara,
>>
>> I think that the combination of the reply-to-all default for all email + a
>> public archiving of the emails is a disaster waiting to happen.
>>
> Respectfully, I strongly disagree. You are relatively new to this list.
> The archives are very valuable to the group since questions often arise that
> have been extensively investigated in past discussions. The archives are a
> resource for newcomers to find out what has been said on these topics
> previously.
>
> Also, some of us that participated in these discussions don't always
> remember what was said. We can go back and check. There are quite a few
> brilliant people that have contributed to these discussions and their input
> is often well thought out.
>
> Voting-project participants here have dealt with the reply to list default
> with no major problems for nearly a year-and-a-half. There have been a very
> few cases (several involving me!) that there has been some small problem.
> The problem with reply-to-sender default is that people will accidentally
> send a message privately when they meant it to go to the list. This also
> has implications -- mainly because it wastes peoples time. It's also
> confusing. As it is, if someone purposely responds to a list email
> privately, this means something. If we go to reply-to-sender default,
> participants will get private responses to list messages giving the
> impression that the sender wanted to make the message private for some
> reason (while they only forgot to change the adressee to list).
>
> This is the *OPEN* Voting Consortium. Openness is valued and expected.
> That's why the default is to the list. I don't like private email because
> if someone has something important to say, I like to have it in the open so
> others can learn.
>
> Alan D.
>
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Tue Nov 30 23:17:10 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 30 2004 - 23:17:43 CST