Len,
You are correct that when a 'Reply To All' is sent, the recipient of the
message will get it twice, but I can think of a couple reasons why you
might want this to occur:
Forgetting to edit the reply: In answer to a call for help, you
enthusiastically send off a masterfully definitive treatise on the exact
characteristics of the Austin Healey gudgeon pin, only to find a day
later that you didn't edit the $%&ing trailers in the email, and
somebody else has already posted an answer to the List. At least by
replying to the List _and_ to the original poster, the lister who
originally asked the question has received the benefit of your wisdom.
Immediacy of Reply. For reasons of shear volume, it takes quite a while
for a post sent to the list to appear in everyone's mailbox. A direct
reply usually gets to the recipient's mailbox much quicker.
Redundancy. Computers are a capricious lot and will eat your email
without the slightest regret. Sending two copies is always better than
sending one.
So, that's why I 'Reply To All'. :-)
(Sent to Len directly and to the List as well)
John P. New
London, Ontario, Canada
'67 BJ8
On Fri, 2004-10-22 at 02:21, Len and/or Marge wrote:
> Acknowledging that I am being redundant since I have commented on this
> before, if you reply to both the sender and The List, the sender will
> receive the message twice. Magnus will probably receive John's message
> twice, once by the direct 'To' address and once through the 'Cc' to The
> List. This, of course is assuming that the sender is a Lister. My
> suggestion is to send it to The List only but start the message with
> "Magnus: ..." or whoever the sender is. No one has ever corrected me on my
> theory. If I am wrong, I am willing to learn. I just know from experience
> that when someone has replied to me and The List, I have received the
> message twice.
Check out the new British Cars Forum:
http://www.team.net/the-local/tiki-view_forum.php?forumId=8
|