[H-GEN] Open source firm releases patch for IE spoofing flaw

[David Duffy]

Greg Black wrote:

>On 2003-12-29, Andrae Muys wrote:
>  
>
>>I consider it rude to send private duplicates when replying to list.
>>    
>>
>
>Then don't do it, just as I have chosen not to do it in this
>instance.  (Mind you, I don't agree with you about this, and I
>only remove duplicate addresses when it's easy or when I know
>for certain that this is what's wanted -- on most lists, it's
>the wrong thing to do.)
>
>  
>
>>It is irritating to have to be forced to 'default' to editing headers to 
>>obtain 'correct' behaviour.
>>    
>>
>
>Surely this is not serious -- the amount of editing that I am
>doing in this message so present the content sensibly, putting
>my remarks where they belong, deleting extraneous material,
>etc., far outweighs the trivial header editing that I've done.
>
>  
>
>>It encourages people taking discussion off list, [...]
>>    
>>
>
>Perhaps it just encourages people to think before they post,
>something that should be encouraged in general as far as I can
>see.
>  
>

I think it discourages the public discussion that this list is all about.

>>It often leads to awkward situations with help contributions/requests 
>>being sent privately when the responder desires them public.
>>    
>>
>
>If the responder wants to direct the replies, then it's really
>easy to do -- just fill in a Reply-To header, as I have done
>here, and all is fixed.  This is the real point -- when a list
>overrides the poster's wishes by enforcing its own Reply-To
>policies, it removes the poster's freedom to make that choice.
>I think this is bad.
>  
>

Ah, but you assume that the poster *has* a wish in the first place.
I honestly think that most people don't want to frig around with
their Reply-To headers just to be involved in this list.

>>These last two I consider serious flaws with the no-reply-to school of 
>>thought, I have yet to find an even faintly credible attempt to counter 
>>to them.
>>    
>>
>
>I'm sorry that you don't find any of many cogent arguments that
>have been put forward, including the ones above, to be credible;
>but that's the way of human interactions, after all -- we will
>never all agree on many things.
>
>For now, the list admins have chosen the way for these lists and
>I think we should all probably just accept things as they are
>and let this topic drop.
>

OK, the list admins decided it. Are they the majority of the list users?
I mean no disrespect when I say this. It just seems like common sense.
They way it is now suits me fine. (defaulting to Humbug Reply-To)
David...