On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 08:35 +1100, Ben Schmidt wrote: 
On 16/01/14 7:59 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
> Am 15.01.2014 21:43, schrieb Ben Schmidt:
>> Another is that sometimes people have direct copies delivered to
>> their inbox, but copies via the list filtered into a folder. Such
>> users want both copies.
>
> the opposite is true such users *do not* want both copies

Another rare occasion where I agree with Harald, it annoys me greatly that people find the need to reply directly as well as a list, I mean we *are* all on the same list, so we will *all* , yes, including intended recipient, get the post, do people think that sending it directly will get read sooner? Not always, this account for instance sorts by list, anything not associate with a list-id or x-been-there, gets sent to an x-blah  folder right at the end, so my inbox stays pretty empty, and your direct messages may not get read for weeks, as I liken it to a second spam folder :)


in some cases, some lit software can be configured to not send a list post to you if you are in the To/CC field, this becomes extra steps to reply to list, I have to drag and drop the darn message into the list "folder" where I prefer to keep list posts for history until I decide to shrink it.

Its also a pet hate of mine where lists are not configured to reply-list only, Thomas has correctly set this one up, pitty a few more didn't follow his lead.

I am such a user, and I want both.

Why? most mailing list software configured correctly with MDA's send just as quick as a direct, the list server I run, (not now but a few years ago) ran a usenet-mailing list gw, some of those lists had 5K members, and a post would take all of 25 seconds to be sent to everyone. so, I fail to see the point of why you want two copies of the same thing,  you either send a reply to hte list for all to see, or, send a direct message to the poster if your comments are not fit for general (list) consumption, not both.