From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id EJ0rOx/FgF9wKwAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 09 Oct 2020 20:16:31 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id ICwJNx/FgF/kPgAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 09 Oct 2020 20:16:31 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 430B19401DE for ; Fri, 9 Oct 2020 20:16:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:53924 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kQyoY-0007sB-4G for larch@yhetil.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2020 16:16:30 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58872) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kQyj6-0003Of-QQ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2020 16:10:54 -0400 Received: from mail.tuxteam.de ([5.199.139.25]:59698) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kQyj2-0007rp-Tx for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2020 16:10:52 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuxteam.de; s=mail; h=From:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:To:Date; bh=S/CUQdfeYwaeqHZWELohUJjD1W3ml9h1Y8TowktKWGs=; b=NqR9+hm4+VC1pAx7lNS5NRDsPuCLFgfD8fwb2gfIMjnOd7COwSwnMLJENhs5aVHxG65O+t8F72DOwFIf6WmnMyad3TF3lcpdRPgdbdAuJg5JQjV0wOgURMpnvwnVpUMImZcQKuv/a1fGi9xnGMmHQpfCa1L/OfGdF+Ef90mrE4t+zCxekZTRTK9GAstsFzbEDTfoV8FlsFh1DYRIG7S1B3azbYsXo2Yg6vg9UtncSWu3G2onHZLnmjbf6zh7U81TW9rJ+ItJmzDkbCbQnOqtRHJMmoo1XYG2vv3k9E5c9+s9yn5smAh/2Ao75PiEzIdUqOufTyHm6iEk40xwlf1bqw==; Received: from tomas by mail.tuxteam.de with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1kQyj1-00073p-0J for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Oct 2020 22:10:47 +0200 Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2020 22:10:41 +0200 To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Subject: Re: Reply-All noise Message-ID: <20201009201041.GA26193@tuxteam.de> References: <4C7J0z6zLHz6tmH@submission01.posteo.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0F1p//8PRICkK4MW" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C7J0z6zLHz6tmH@submission01.posteo.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) From: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=5.199.139.25; envelope-from=tomas@tuxteam.de; helo=mail.tuxteam.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/10/09 16:10:46 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.1-3.10 [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=tuxteam.de header.s=mail header.b=NqR9+hm4; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -3.31 X-TUID: Cv4H9HIwPvju --0F1p//8PRICkK4MW Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 09:24:34PM +0200, c.buhtz@posteo.jp wrote: > Hi, >=20 > I had this discussion in several mailinglists but gave up. >=20 > But I am suprised to see this phenomenon in a emacs related (means: > "super nerdy") mailinglist, too. >=20 > So tell me please how do you handle this "problem"? Or do I setup > something wrong with my list account? There is no clear-cut answer to that. For mailing lists which allow posting by non-subscribers (this is one), reply-to-all makes more sense to reply-to-all, since you can't be sure that everyone is subscribed. As for what I do, I have a mail filter (procmail) which weeds out duplicates fairly effectively. For this list, specifically, which is managed by Mailman, you can tell the list manager [1] to not send you a duplicate when your address is in the To: or Cc: header field. Note that you'll get the copy sent to you, not the one sent via the list; if you are filtering based on list headers, this might not be what you want. To appreciate the whole "interesting" complexity see [2]. In a nutshell, there's no ideal solution working for all tastes. Cheers [1] https://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/mailman-member/node21.html [2] http://david.woodhou.se/reply-to-list.html - t --0F1p//8PRICkK4MW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAl+Aw8EACgkQBcgs9XrR2kbZSgCfR+1+kTCCTrh+seBPS/jWggdk 7pEAniSfYUUA50Nq+Zm1BLjuP8S6FYF4 =AgVo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0F1p//8PRICkK4MW--