<html>
<!-- BEGIN WEBMAIL STATIONERY -->
<head></head>
<body>
<!-- WEBMAIL STATIONERY notheme -->
<div></div>
<!--<BR>-->
<div> </div>
<blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px;">
-------------- Original message from Malcolm Cohen <malcolm@nag-j.co.jp>: --------------
<br>
<br>
<br>> Hi Bill,
<br>>
<br>> Bill Long wrote:
<br>> > That would be effectively the same as going back to the old days when
<br>> > the reply-to field was not overwritten, and you always used "reply all"
<br>> > instead. That seems like the simplest solution.
<br>> >
<br>> >
<br>> I agree that that would be preferable to the current situation.
<br><br>Why do you all think people will suddenly start to use reply all? Back in the<br>"good old days" there would be threads where it was obvious that someone<br>had clicked "reply" and sent a [unintended] personal message to the author.<br>Eventually, the thread became public again and was hard to follow.<br><br>Wouldn't a better solution be to include WG5 in the J3 mail list? Then they'd<br>never miss an important J3 message. A few years ago, this would have been<br>potentially impractical because J3 meeting papers were routinely posted to <br>the J3 e-mail list. Now that they are uploaded to the web by magic, there's<br>much less traffic and the discussions seem to be more germane to WG5.<br><br>Dick Hendrickson<br><br>>
<br>> Cheers,
<br>> --
<br>> .....................Malcolm Cohen, Nihon NAG, Tokyo.
<br>>
<br>>
<br>> _______________________________________________
<br>> J3 mailing list
<br>> J3@j3-fortran.org
<br>> http://j3-fortran.org/mailman/listinfo/j3
</blockquote>
<!-- END WEBMAIL STATIONERY -->
</body>
</html>