> Hmm.. this goes against what I perceived to be the general mailing list > logic. To reply to the sender, hit reply. To reply to the list, reply to > all. This is the way I was taught to set up lists and they way I always > do it. I thought that was just kind of accepted as the method everyone > used. the problem I see with this, is that if you reply to all; the address of the person you replied to, will appear in the list of To: or cc: addresses, when the post appears on the list. if someone then replies to *that* message, it ends up going to the list, and as a personal reply to anyone that has been sent a personal message, and to the sender. after several generations of this, you can end up with a lot of people all recieving personal copies of a message. in some ways this is good; but if the topic strays, it might get a bit irksome. I see it happen all the time on the netbsd-hpcmips list. It also goes against the principle (IMHO) of keeping messages short and simple. including extraneous people in replies, is as bad as extraneous text (worse, if you're one of the people recieving an extraneous copy). in any case; isn't sending mail to multiple recipients who want to read it, what the list is for in the first place? (mail sorting and list queue time problems aside). Carl. -- Network Engineer Real-Time Enterprises www.real-time.com