At 01:18 PM 2/20/98 -0500, JHarper33(AT)aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 98-02-20 11:42:14 EST, RCookHook(AT)aol.com writes:
>
>> Subj: Re: New TMer - "My Story"
>> Date: 98-02-20 11:42:14 EST
>> From: RCookHook(AT)aol.com
>> To: JVLCJVLC(AT)aol.com, JHarper33(AT)aol.com, SAFIRTH(AT)dow.com,
>NBlalock(AT)elpc.org,
>> tmic-list(AT)eskimo.com, OB5906(AT)aol.com
>>
>> Jim Lubin:
>>
>> I see that some people are hitting REPLY TO ALL, and also adding
additional
>> names to their address slot. That is making one lady quite mad because
she
>> was put on someone's address list when they reply, not from the TM list.
>>
>> Bob from Houston
>
>When we hit "reply to all,"
>the reply goes to every address in both the "To:" and "From:" lines. So if
>there are a number of replies back and forth on the same thread, each
person's
>name who replied gets added. Then any address on that line gets 2 posts if
>they're on the tmic list, one to their address listed, and one from the tmic
>list. One way to eliminate this would be to hit "reply to all" but then in
the
>"To:" section delete all addresses but the tmic-list one. I think that's
where
>all the names are coming from. People shouldn't add other names unless their
>particular post would be of interest to someone not on the list (-- a better
>solution would be to copy and send the post to that person separately so they
>don't then get all the replies), but even so, that shouldn't account for them
>getting on someone's list -- they'd get anything else on the same thread when
>someone hit "reply to all", but would have to subscribe individually to
get on
>a list server. At least, that is my understanding, which is certainly not
>infallible. :)
>
>The lady you are referring to wouldn't be "TMeester," would it, who has been
>sending multiple "unsubscribe" notices to the list? I sent her two notes
about
>how to unsubscribe, copied from Jim's previous posting with those
>instructions, but apparently she hasn't done that.
>
>Barbara
>