Erik wrote ..

> Mitch et al:
>
> I voted to keep it the way that is.
>
> My human nature being as it is, I'll always resspond in the easiest
> manner, unless there isa compelling reason to do otherwise. So, at
> present, even if a post might really be directed to one person, I'll
> respond to the default, in this case, to all. If I need to respond to
> one, as you say, I'll change the address.
>
> I just know, if the default was to the sender, I'd be less likely to
> change the address to the group each time.
>
> I think there is a benefit to for replies to go the group as a whole,
> unless, of course, an individual wished otherwise.. We all get a sense
> of the activity going on throughout the group, making it that much more
> interesting. Especially for newcomers, who may prefer to sit and watch
> for a while.
>
> Think Synergy!
>
> Erik


I am in accord with Erik. I tried to vote this morning, but couldn't
recall my user name with e-groups, so couldn't login :-(

However, I CAN change the reply to address on my e-mail form when I
need to!

Tom

Tom Cooch
tcooch@sover.net

aka The Orient Express
Braintree, VT

"The game is afoot!"

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/letterbox-usa
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

Mitch et al:

I voted to keep it the way that is.

My human nature being as it is, I'll always resspond in the easiest
manner, unless there isa compelling reason to do otherwise. So, at
present, even if a post might really be directed to one person, I'll
respond to the default, in this case, to all. If I need to respond to
one, as you say, I'll change the address.

I just know, if the default was to the sender, I'd be less likely to
change the address to the group each time.

I think there is a benefit to for replies to go the group as a whole,
unless, of course, an individual wished otherwise.. We all get a sense
of the activity going on throughout the group, making it that much more
interesting. Especially for newcomers, who may prefer to sit and watch
for a while.

Think Synergy!

Erik


------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/letterbox-usa
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

In a message dated 4/18/99 10:53:57 AM Central Daylight Time,
davisarc@wcvt.com writes:

> My human nature being as it is, I'll always resspond in the easiest
> manner, unless there isa compelling reason to do otherwise. So, at
> present, even if a post might really be directed to one person, I'll
> respond to the default, in this case, to all. If I need to respond to
> one, as you say, I'll change the address.
>
> I just know, if the default was to the sender, I'd be less likely to
> change the address to the group each time.
>
Following are the reasons that I prefer the "reply sender" option.
The only reason, IMO, to leave it the way as it is now is if a subscriber's
mail program does not have a "reply all" option.
I don't think it's any harder to hit "reply all" than just "reply".

1) While I understand the concept of "reply to list" encouraging
discussion, I think in reality it will always lead to people inadvertently
replying to the list when they really want to reply to an individual.
Not only can this be embarrassing, it also makes it easier to accidentally
post a phone number or mailing address at large, which is generally
not recommended.

2) On lists set up with "reply to sender" as default, when I have
replied to an individual when I meant to reply to the group at large,
I can always resend to the list.
The other way around, though, you can't take it back.

3) On another list I was on, it only took one accidental post to make
me think that I could get along very well without ever replying to
anything. If anyone here has that kind of mindset, that's the REAL
conversation stifler! Obviously, I have personally overcome the
inclination to lay low, but that doesn't mean I don't make mistakes
sometimes! :-}

Deborah

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/letterbox-usa
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

I much prefer that it stay the way it is. I like REPLY TO ALL as the first
option. If I wish to respond to an individual it's easier to fix that than
to REPLY TO ALL if it's only to an individual in my mail program.

julie

At 2:10 AM -0400 4/18/99, Letterboxr@aol.com wrote:
>Fellow letterboxers,
>Recently, I've been made aware of at least one person's desire that we change
>the way this talk list works. Since we have such a wonderful history of
>making decisions as a group, I thought I should bring the issue to all of you
>for your opinions.
>Currently, the list is set up such that all replies are, by default, sent to
>the entire group. This helps encourage us to keep the conversation so that
>we can all participate. However, if you forget and try to send a personal
>reply to the sender of a message without changing the SEND TO address in your
>email, it could be embarrassing. In order to send a reply only to the person
>who sent the original message, you have to cut and paste their email address
>into the SEND TO box, in place of the talk list address.
>The alternative is to have the default set for individual replies. With this
>option, most email servers include a REPLY TO ALL button that let's you reply
>to the entire group. (In such cases, you may want to remove the sender's
>address from the SEND TO box, or else they will receive the message twice,
>once from you and once from the list) The down side of this option is that
>it's so easy to just reply to the person who sent the message, when the
>entire group might be interested in hearing what you've got to say (assuming
>it's related to letterboxing).
>Both options have their good points and bad, and I've seen it done both ways
>on other lists. I personally have no real preference, although I'm slightly
>concerned that change will create confusion. If change serves our needs
>better, though, it is justified. What do the rest of you think? Please feel
>free to post your opinions to the list.
>Meanwhile, I'm going to give the Egroups polling option another try by
>sending out a poll to the group so we can all vote for whether we would
>rather leave the default set at REPLY TO GROUP, or if we would prefer to
>change it to REPLY TO SENDER. Your input is appreciated, so please take the
>time to respond to the poll.
>Thanks, in advance, for your interest and participation.
>Mitch, Der Mad Stamper
>Portland, OR
>Letterboxing USA talk list co-administrator
> eGroups eLerts!
> Exclusive discounts from the hottest online bookstores
> Click Here to Join Now!
>
>
>
>eGroup home:
>http://www.eGroups.com/list/letterbox
>-usa
> Free Web-based e-mail groups by www.eGroups.com


"Don't compromise yourself. You are all you've got." --Janis Joplin

It's the Atmospheric Cookie!
http://members.tripod.com/~anniespark1e/links.html



------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/letterbox-usa
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

umm... I forgot my egrope password as well... please put me down for
"reply to list"... I am on mailing lists that do it both ways & I find
it easier to reply to the list as the norm & private posts as the
exception.

--
Thom Cheney
tcgrafx... among other things

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/letterbox-usa
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com