(j3.2006) (SC22WG5.3994) Paper 09-238

[Miles Ellis]

One problem with Dick's suggestion is that the J3 address is included  
in the WG5 list - as are most other national Fortran lists.  So  
unless some mail system is clever enough to detect it that would set  
up an infinite loop (;-)

Miles

-----------
On 12 Jun 2009, at 16:22, dick.hendrickson at att.net wrote:

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