lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: duration and pitch in a function


From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: duration and pitch in a function
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 02:27:01 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.92 (gnu/linux)

Matthew Collett <address@hidden> writes:

> On 8/12/2011, at 10:48 pm, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> Please, *never*, *never*, *never* send a "courtesy copy" of a public
>> answer as a private mail when answering on a mailing list unless you
>> have been _explicitly_ asked to provide such a copy.
>> 
>> Otherwise, you set up _two_ different communication channels that the
>> person you are showing your "courtesy" then has to answer separately.
>> It is a great nuisance and additional work and hassle.
>
> Normally I'd agree with you, but in fairness to Paolo I observe that
> this is the only mailing list I am or ever have been a member of in
> which the default behaviour is to reply to the sender (only) rather
> than to the list.  I have in consequence more than once
> unintentionally sent a separate "courtesy copy" message.

You arae confusing a _separate_ "courtesy copy", namely one for which
the _only_ recipient in the headers is the person you are replying to,
with _including_ the intended recipient in the list of recipients of the
_same_ mail.

The latter does _not_ set up a separate communication channel.  In fact,
since the mailing list server can then _see_ that the recipient is
already going to get a separate copy, it does not even bother sending
out a copy of its own (unless the recipient unticked the standard
"nocopy" option in his personal settings).

Including the person in the list of headers you are replying to is
normal (unless you are sending the "main" article through a news server
like gmane instead of the mailing list server directly).  Sending a
_separate_ copy without any indication that it _is_ a separate copy (so
that either the recipient or the mailing list server can recognize the
duplication) isn't.  Those _separate_ mails are what is cynically called
"courtesy copy" since they, as a rule, cause confusion and irritation,
making the same content travel twice, with different reply-to headers,
and without an indication of the duplication.

-- 
David Kastrup



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]