[TriLUG] About "Private notes"

[Jack Hill]

On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:14:35 -0400
Steve Litt <slitt at troubleshooters.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 18:59:25 -0400 (EDT)
> Jack Hill <jackhill at jackhill.us> wrote:
> 
> > My preference if for the list software to not munge the reply-to
> > field at all.
> > 
> > More discussion can be found here: 
> > http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/listreplyto.html
> 
> Ah yes, the Chip Rosenthal defense. I should employ his techniques
> more often:
> 
> 1) Adopt a tone of superiority and authority, then act like those who
> disagree are idiots.

Sure, but that doesn’t mean his whole argument can be dismissed. Also,
I liked that page because there was also a response to Rosenthal’s post.

I should have known from the title of the post that he was going to use
rhetorical tricks. See “‘Considered Harmful’ Essays Considered Harmful”
<http://meyerweb.com/eric/comment/chech.html>

> 2) Base the whole argument on the user having "a reasonable mailer",
> whatever that is.
>
> 4) Prioritize the technology (the RFC's) over the intended function
> (discussion list)
[I reordered these so I could respond to them togeather]

Some MUAs are better than others though. For instance, users of GMail
Webmail can’t set Reply-To: headers. Alpine doesn’t (as far as I know)
understand pgp/mime.

That said, the mail RFC’s suck
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JENdgiAPD6c> so we’re between a rock
and a hard place. 

> 3) Use an ugly sounding name "munge" instead of just saying "default
> reply to the list".

Munge does not mean what I thought it meant. I retract my usage of it.

> 5) Illustrate how wonderfully it works out with my own arcane
> technology (elm).

At least he doesn’t use inc (yes, I know people who do…)
 
> 6) Make it about the brain-dead vs. the conscientious, instead of
> convenience in pursuit of the intended function.
> 
> -*-*-
> 
> I think I'll use the preceding techniques to write an article called
> "Brake munging (antilock brakes) considered dangerous". My 1959
> Plymouth doesn't use brake munging, and it's easy to stop by
> repeatedly backing off the brake when it starts to skid. This complies
> with the principle of least surprise, as with a reasonable braking
> system like my 59 Plymouth, you never have that buzzing pushback from
> your brake pedal. Brake munging adds unnecessary complexity to coddle
> the brain-dead at the expense of the conscientious. 

This is funny. Also, I’ve actually met people who don’t like anti-lock
brakes… (perhaps what they don’t like is the fancier/more complex
vehicle stability control. I like those things, but would be even
happier if their implementation could be reviewed in public).
 
> Chip Rosenthal my aunt's hat!
> 
> SteveT

Jack
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.trilug.org/pipermail/trilug/attachments/20120419/5eda6fbc/attachment.pgp>