iplayer audio to lpcm

[David Woodhouse]

On Sat, 2014-11-08 at 23:54 +0000, Square Penguin wrote:
> If you're using Thunderbird on Mac as I am now this is not the case by 
> default. Thunderbird offers 'reply' and 'smart reply' which attempts to 
> intelligently select the behaviour you desire.
> 
> It's default smart reply is reply to list, and there is seemingly no 
> option to change that.

Hm, not the first instance of Thunderbird doing entirely the wrong
thing. Thanks for pointing it out.

As noted in my reply-to-list.html page, Evolution does the opposite. Its
"Group Reply" is reply-to-all by default, and it'll even *warn* you if
you hit the private 'reply' button and it looks like it's going to be
hijacked by a bogus Reply-To: header.

> FWIW I happen to agree with you that, if you take the underlying 
> 'problems' you've laid out in your etiquette pages as valid, the scheme 
> you have is the one that solves the most 'problems' whilst maximising 
> 'safe' visibility/delivery of message and minimising unsafe/embarrassing 
> accidental public replying where it's not wanted.
>
> I suppose some people don't consider those underlying 'problems' valid 
> and so disagree with the setup here, but taking them as valid then 
> there's no faulting the logic of the way things are setup here.

The problems are all valid. All of the Fred, John, Mary, Claire and Karl
examples represent classes of people who *do* indisputably exist, in
significant numbers.

The only way you could claim that some of them are invalid is to
blatantly disregard the facts, or to claim that everyone who doesn't use
email the way *you* use it is somehow "wrong" and should not be
considered.

If you aren't doing that, then the only sane thing you *can* do is look
at all the valid use cases and do what causes the minimal *overall*
trouble for the full set of users.

> - Just a side note on that, I don't have an opinion in the underlying 
> validity of those 'problems'. Seems like a case of personal discipline 
> to me, 'them's the rules'...so abide by them, it's not exactly onerous 
> to do so. I screw up the odd reply but no harm is done and I guess 
> that's a benefit of the way you have things setup.

Yeah, the habits of the fingers are the hardest to unlearn. Whatever you
normally press to reply to a list mail, that's what they'll press even
if you *are* trying to think for yourself and take control. :)

Note that if you deal with the Reply-To: lists as the anomaly they are,
then you shouldn't screw up replies. If you *always* use the 'reply all'
button for replying to lists, even those silly lists which have hijacked
the private 'reply' to do the same thing, then it's nice and simple and
your fingers will get it right.

You might still get tricked into sending public replies on those bad
lists, when you meant to send private replies — and that's the *only*
thing their silly Reply-To: setting will achieve. But that was always
going to be a problem. As I noted above, Evolution attempts to save you
from that.

> > Seriously, when I start to help someone because I happen to come across
> > their email in one of the dozens of mailing lists to which I'm
> > subscribed, and they *fail* to reply to me directly, I'm very unlikely
> > to see their response.
> 
> Quick question - how do you deal with CC's in your inbox and duplicate 
> messages in mailing list folders (assuming you filter to folders)? 
> Simply ignore the duplicates or do you have a filtering/deletion scheme 
> in place?

I get a copy in the list folder, and a copy in my inbox. The list folder
contains a complete archive of all list traffic, including my own posts
at the right point in the threaded display. I can always go back to it
and find everything, in the right order.

And the copy in my inbox means that I'll see it immediately, even if I'm
away from the real computer and only looking at my phone or other mobile
device. Or indeed even if I *am* at a real computer but not checking
some or all of the dozens of mailing list folders.

There are some folders I might not actually look at more than once or
twice a year. I have literally been known to reply to a message there,
trying to help someone out, and not see their response for *months*
because they didn't do me the courtesy of replying directly to me.


Both copies are useful, so I certainly don't have anything in place to
eliminate either of them. Of course, if someone had different usage
habits they *could* do such a thing. For someone who receives
"duplicates" and doesn't want them, it's fairly trivial to arrange some
kind of filtering. But if you don't receive the message at *all*, which
happens in some cases when people reply only to the list, it's
*impossible* to cope. There is absolutely nothing that you can do.

Again, unless you're doing to do the utterly disingenuous thing of
pretending that whole classes of user don't exist or somehow aren't
"valid", the consideration of the failure modes leaves you with only one
reasonable course of action.


-- 
dwmw2
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 5745 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/get_iplayer/attachments/20141110/78160702/attachment.bin>