Re: Why can't you guys not even properly run a mailing list?

[Greg Alexander <galexand@xxxxxxx>]

>Hi,
>
>I just got some personal answers to reactions I thought I had posted
>to the list, but a short examination showed that I had walked in the
>old trap again of just clicking the reply button without changing the
>to-address, that this brain-dead mailing list still requires.
>I already complained about this years ago, but the people that run
>this mailing list are obviously as thick as some people around the
>kernel of the MISC-processor are.

Are you requesting that the headers include Reply-to:
MISC@pisa.rockefeller.edu?  I personally would prefer this.  However, you
are not in a clear majority or a clear correctness in this opinion.  There
is a huge (and well documented, thanks to mailing list archives) religious
war almost at the level of vi vs. emacs (hail vi!).  If you were clearly
in the right I'd agree with you bashing the list owner, but this is a very
grey area and it wouldn't surprise me if the list owner has solid reasons
for it.
	Further, most modern mailers will automatically at least ask you
if you want to reply to all receivers.  I think this is a good thing for a
mailer to do: it essentially raises the question "do you want to post to
the list?"  Unfortunately my mailer does not, and apparently your mailer
doesn't.  I hereby demand that you, you inadequate mailer user, install a
new mailer!  heh.

>Okay, being an ingenieur (that's master of science here in the
>Netherlands) I think in solutions and not in problems of ideals.
>
>I propose that either:
>1. The list manager finally resolves the problem.
>2. We transfer the list to egroups or another such service.
>   I'm prepared to manage the new list.

You will find that some of us are opposed to the mixing of mailing and
web. One thing to note here is that nobody should try to mix email and web
because email-managed mailing lists work just fine, so anybody who DOES
do it on the web is probably stupid.  Not a 100% thing but I've had very
bad experiences with stupid web mailing lists.  The fact of the matter is
that the ever-growing class of people who see the web as their hammer and
everything as a nail are near-universally retarded.

>3. We do as described in point 2 and change the subject of
>   the list to computer (processor) architecture in general.

Why not just use comp.arch?