[Mailman-Users] Reply to list instead of poster (was: Muti-Mailmaninstall)
Allan Odgaard
8qbfgka02 at sneakemail.com
Thu Jun 19 16:56:41 CEST 2008
On 19 Jun 2008, at 15:53, Mark Sapiro wrote:
> [...] You have said in another thread that these links contribute to
> excessive verbosity of the labels, but they often link to useful
> supplemental information.
I don’t dispute that. I am sure there are lots of useful info there,
but it drowns in the excessive verbosity. Take the reply-to UI in
question:
Reply-To: header munging
Should any existing Reply-To: header
found in the original message be
stripped? If so, this will be done (o) No ( ) Yes
regardless of whether an explict
Reply-To: header is added by Mailman or
not. (Edit first_strip_reply_to)
Where are replies to list messages
directed? Poster is strongly recommended (o) Poster ( ) This list
for most mailing lists. (Details for ( ) Explicit address
reply_goes_to_list)
Explicit Reply-To: header. (Details for
[ ]
reply_to_address)
That’s almost 100 words and the link that explains why the Poster
option is recommended bears the mundane title of “(Details for
reply_goes_to_list)” and is part of a label which is really 3 sentences.
Here is how I would change all of the above:
List replies go to: (o) Poster (recommended, more info)
( ) The list
[x] Strip existing Reply-To header
( ) Other: [ ]
The grouping should make it clear how the settings relate to each
other, so no need for long explanations about the explicit Reply-To
address etc.¹
Less text means better chance the user will read/grasp it. I only
added one “more info” link and put it right next to the ‘recommended’
text, so it should be clear from context that it will elaborate on why
this is the recommended setting.
¹ The third setting is dependent on list replies going to the list and
while it indicates that the first setting can be used even for replies
sent to poster, that does IMHO not make much sense.
More information about the Mailman-Users
mailing list