W. Ian Blanton | 10 Feb 2009 05:57
Favicon

So, is this list dead?

	I've been a little busier than usual, and was just realizing that the  
list seems, um...dead. Anyone? Anyone?

                                                                                        -Ian
--

-- 
W. "Ian" Blanton, Director of Consulting Group, Tech Superpowers, Inc.
Technology for Genius (tm). All Mac, all the way.
252 Newbury St. Boston, MA. 02116  http://www.techsuperpowers.com
Phone: 617.267.9716x705       Net:     Ian <at> techsuperpowers.com
Troy Brandt | 10 Feb 2009 07:19

Re: So, is this list dead?

Hi,

Most OmniWeb discussions happen on our forum here:

http://forums.omnigroup.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3

But people are of course welcome to use the list still, there are  
still a good number of subscribers. People just tend to prefer the  
forums I think.

-Troy

On Feb 9, 2009, at 8:57 PM, W. Ian Blanton wrote:

> 	I've been a little busier than usual, and was just realizing that  
> the list seems, um...dead. Anyone? Anyone?
>
>                                                                                       -Ian
> -- 
> W. "Ian" Blanton, Director of Consulting Group, Tech Superpowers, Inc.
> Technology for Genius (tm). All Mac, all the way.
> 252 Newbury St. Boston, MA. 02116  http://www.techsuperpowers.com
> Phone: 617.267.9716x705       Net:     Ian <at> techsuperpowers.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OmniWeb-l mailing list
> OmniWeb-l <at> omnigroup.com
> http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/omniweb-l
>
(Continue reading)

Bill Wisse | 10 Feb 2009 22:29
Picon

Re: So, is this list dead?


On 9/02/2009, at 7:19 PM, Troy Brandt wrote:

> But people are of course welcome to use the list still, there are  
> still a good number of subscribers. People just tend to prefer the  
> forums I think.
>
> -Troy

This list would also be a lot easier to use if we just could hit reply  
and the answer would go to
the list.

Now you have to remember to hit reply all, then you have to remove the  
previous sender name .

Greetings from
/bill at 169 west , 19 south.
Disclaimer: Any errors in spelling, tact, or fact are
transmission errors
Joshua Root | 10 Feb 2009 22:55
Picon

Re: So, is this list dead?

Bill Wisse wrote:
> 
> On 9/02/2009, at 7:19 PM, Troy Brandt wrote:
> 
>> But people are of course welcome to use the list still, there are
>> still a good number of subscribers. People just tend to prefer the
>> forums I think.
>>
>> -Troy
> 
> This list would also be a lot easier to use if we just could hit reply
> and the answer would go to
> the list.

No thanks, I don't want my attempted private replies going to the public
list.

> Now you have to remember to hit reply all, then you have to remove the
> previous sender name .

If you don't want to reply to the sender of the message, why are you
using Reply?

- Josh
Bill Wisse | 10 Feb 2009 23:20
Picon

Re: So, is this list dead?


On 10/02/2009, at 10:55 AM, Joshua Root wrote:

> No thanks, I don't want my attempted private replies going to the  
> public
> list.

This is a list, if you make a reply it should go to the list.

If you want to make private replies, that's fine but then you need to  
make changes not the other way around.

>
>
>> Now you have to remember to hit reply all, then you have to remove  
>> the
>> previous sender name .
>
> If you don't want to reply to the sender of the message, why are you
> using Reply?

I reply to the sender through the list.

So, reply should give me To: Omniweb list, not the senders name .

I have to remember ( and this is the ONLY list of all the lists I'm on  
which does this)
to hit Reply all  and then remove the senders address.

Greetings from
(Continue reading)

Joshua Root | 10 Feb 2009 23:53
Picon

Re: So, is this list dead?

Bill Wisse wrote:
> 
> if you make a reply it should go to the list.
> 
> If you want to make private replies, that's fine but then you need to
> make changes not the other way around.

My position is essentially the opposite.

If you make a reply, it should go to the sender.

If you want to reply to the other recipients as well as the sender,
that's what Reply All is for.

- Josh
Bill Wisse | 11 Feb 2009 00:17
Picon

Re: So, is this list dead?


On 10/02/2009, at 11:53 AM, Joshua Root wrote:

> My position is essentially the opposite.
>
> If you make a reply, it should go to the sender.

Why are you a member of a list?

The sender sends a message to the list. Every member of that list  
reads the message
and then you send an answer *only* to the sender, or to the list AND  
the member.

Doesn't make any sense.  Anyway why bother, I use this list only once  
in a blue moon.

Greetings from
/bill at 169 west , 19 south.
Disclaimer: Any errors in spelling, tact, or fact are
transmission errors
Beth Katz | 10 Feb 2009 23:39

Re: So, is this list dead?

I'm an another list with hundreds of very technically
competent people where it is set up like this one.
Please leave it this way.

Beth Katz

On Feb 10, 2009, at 5:20 PM, Bill Wisse wrote:

> I have to remember ( and this is the ONLY list of all the lists I'm  
> on which does this)
> to hit Reply all  and then remove the senders address.
Christian Roth | 10 Feb 2009 23:20
Picon
Picon

Re: So, is this list dead?

>If you don't want to reply to the sender of the message, why are you
>using Reply?

Which other, more appropriate command are you suggesting?

Regards, Christian
Joshua Root | 10 Feb 2009 23:54
Picon

Re: So, is this list dead?

Christian Roth wrote:
>> If you don't want to reply to the sender of the message, why are you
>> using Reply?
> 
> Which other, more appropriate command are you suggesting?

Depends exactly what you _do_ want to do.

- Josh
Christian Roth | 11 Feb 2009 00:31
Picon
Picon

[OT] Re: So, is this list dead?

>>> If you don't want to reply to the sender of the message, why are you
>>> using Reply?
>> 
>> Which other, more appropriate command are you suggesting?
>
>Depends exactly what you _do_ want to do.

I want to reply to the list, since only by replying to the list, others
can benefit or react to my answer. If I reply to the sender only, nobody
else sees it, so the list would become just a list of questions.

The bad thing with "reply to sender" on lists is that mostly those who
advocate its use don't handle it correctly, specifically: they use
"reply to all" without editing the recipients list, which i consider
rude: I got your message twice (once directly, once via the list), and
am forced to handle the duplicate (i.e. delete it manually).

In general, people who subscribe to a list, also do read it - especially
after they have posted a question or a comment. So there's absolutely no
need to send a duplicate of reply posts to the people involved in the
discussion.

But anyway, it's OmniGroup's list, and they sure have thought thoroughly
about how they want it set up and have decided on "reply to sender".
It's their choice, and since they run it for the benefit of all of us
subscribers - fair enough! But it also means that we have to use the
setup correctly, i.e. in the 99% of cases where we want the reply to go
to the list, we need to make sure that we edit our post's recipient list
appropriately to only(!) include the list address. In the usual case
this would mean to do a "Reply to all", then delete all recipients that
(Continue reading)

Joshua Root | 11 Feb 2009 00:45
Picon

Re: [OT] Re: So, is this list dead?

Christian Roth wrote:
>>>> If you don't want to reply to the sender of the message, why are you
>>>> using Reply?
>>> Which other, more appropriate command are you suggesting?
>> Depends exactly what you _do_ want to do.
> 
> I want to reply to the list, since only by replying to the list, others
> can benefit or react to my answer. If I reply to the sender only, nobody
> else sees it, so the list would become just a list of questions.
> 
> The bad thing with "reply to sender" on lists is that mostly those who
> advocate its use don't handle it correctly, specifically: they use
> "reply to all" without editing the recipients list, which i consider
> rude: I got your message twice (once directly, once via the list), and
> am forced to handle the duplicate (i.e. delete it manually).

All the list software I've used will prevent duplicates being received.
You got a duplicate of my earlier reply because of an unrelated failure
on my part, since I initially sent from the wrong address and the list
rejected it.

- Josh
Troy Brandt | 11 Feb 2009 01:30

Re: [OT] Re: So, is this list dead?


On Feb 10, 2009, at 3:45 PM, Joshua Root wrote:

> Christian Roth wrote:
>>>>> If you don't want to reply to the sender of the message, why are  
>>>>> you
>>>>> using Reply?
>>>> Which other, more appropriate command are you suggesting?
>>> Depends exactly what you _do_ want to do.
>>
>> I want to reply to the list, since only by replying to the list,  
>> others
>> can benefit or react to my answer. If I reply to the sender only,  
>> nobody
>> else sees it, so the list would become just a list of questions.
>>
>> The bad thing with "reply to sender" on lists is that mostly those  
>> who
>> advocate its use don't handle it correctly, specifically: they use
>> "reply to all" without editing the recipients list, which i consider
>> rude: I got your message twice (once directly, once via the list),  
>> and
>> am forced to handle the duplicate (i.e. delete it manually).
>
> All the list software I've used will prevent duplicates being  
> received.
> You got a duplicate of my earlier reply because of an unrelated  
> failure
> on my part, since I initially sent from the wrong address and the list
> rejected it.
(Continue reading)

Steffen Börner | 10 Feb 2009 22:34
Picon
Favicon

Re: So, is this list dead?

Safari for online banking omniweb for multiple tab news read sessions
camino as a backup
Am 10.02.2009 um 21:29 schrieb Bill Wisse:

>
> On 9/02/2009, at 7:19 PM, Troy Brandt wrote:
>
>> But people are of course welcome to use the list still, there are  
>> still a good number of subscribers. People just tend to prefer the  
>> forums I think.
>>
>> -Troy
>
> This list would also be a lot easier to use if we just could hit  
> reply and the answer would go to
> the list.
>
>
> Now you have to remember to hit reply all, then you have to remove  
> the previous sender name .
I second that.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Greetings from
> /bill at 169 west , 19 south.
> Disclaimer: Any errors in spelling, tact, or fact are
(Continue reading)

Doug Lerner | 10 Feb 2009 08:01

Re: So, is this list dead?

Hi,

You might want to send out a notice about your forums to everybody on  
the various lists. This is the first time I heard there were forums. :)

Thanks,

doug

On Feb 10, 2009, at 3:19 PM, Troy Brandt wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Most OmniWeb discussions happen on our forum here:
>
> http://forums.omnigroup.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3
>
> But people are of course welcome to use the list still, there are  
> still a good number of subscribers. People just tend to prefer the  
> forums I think.
>
> -Troy
>
>
> On Feb 9, 2009, at 8:57 PM, W. Ian Blanton wrote:
>
>> 	I've been a little busier than usual, and was just realizing that  
>> the list seems, um...dead. Anyone? Anyone?
>>
>>                                                                                      -Ian
(Continue reading)

Beth Katz | 10 Feb 2009 13:13

Re: So, is this list dead?

I don't have the time to bother with yet another forum
although I did know about it, have posted there, and
have it in my forum folder on my Favorites.

So I appreciate being on a quiet list where I can ask or
answer a question or two sometimes.

I wonder how many people on this list use OmniWeb as their
primary web browser. I do, but I need to use Firefox to post
in the Comcast User Help Forums. Those folks need help unlike
the majority of OmniWeb users.

Beth Katz - going back to being quiet

Omni Group Forums: http://forums.omnigroup.com/index.php

On Feb 10, 2009, at 2:01 AM, Doug Lerner wrote:

> Hi,
>
> You might want to send out a notice about your forums to
> everybody on the various lists. This is the first time
> I heard there were forums. :)
>
> Thanks,
>
> doug
Eric Hall | 13 Feb 2009 19:11
Favicon

Re: So, is this list dead?

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 07:13:30AM -0500, Beth Katz wrote:
> I don't have the time to bother with yet another forum
> although I did know about it, have posted there, and
> have it in my forum folder on my Favorites.
> 
> So I appreciate being on a quiet list where I can ask or
> answer a question or two sometimes.

	I prefer the list to the forums, I can look
through email far faster than I can look through
the forums - that alone makes a list a much better
solution for me.

> 
> I wonder how many people on this list use OmniWeb as their
> primary web browser. I do, but I need to use Firefox to post
> in the Comcast User Help Forums. Those folks need help unlike
> the majority of OmniWeb users.
> 

	I use OW as my primary browser, heavily overloaded with
too many windows and tabs (like I killed off the applescript that
counted them because it was taking too long).  I use FF where
Safari/OW won't work properly.

		-eric
Beth Katz | 15 Feb 2009 04:53

Re: So, is this list dead?

I know that this list isn't private and anyone can join.
And I realize that some posts I made on Usenet in 1983
are available now on the web. I'm careful what I post.

Nevertheless, I was surprised that when I did a Google search
using my name and ISP name as part of a check for metatags,
this thread came up at Nabble:
http://www.nabble.com/So%2C-is-this-list-dead--to21928207.html

The list can be posted to and read at Nabble:
http://www.nabble.com/OmniWeb-f14338.html

This just doesn't feel "right".

Beth Katz
Jared Earle | 15 Feb 2009 11:41
Picon

Re: So, is this list dead?

On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 3:53 AM, Beth Katz <katz <at> cs.millersville.edu> wrote:
> This just doesn't feel "right".

http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/archive/omniweb-l/

The archives for this list are public, which can be useful. The
downside is that ... um, archives for this list are public.

Omniweb-l is in no way a private list. Once archives are public, you
have no control over what happens to them.

--

-- 
 Jared Earle :: There is no SPORK
 jearle <at> gmail.com :: http://jearle.eu
 Hosting :: http://cat5.org
 Blog :: http://blog.23x.net
Darrel E. Knutson | 10 Feb 2009 14:44
Favicon

Re: So, is this list dead?

>I wonder how many people on this list use OmniWeb as their
>primary web browser.

Me, for one. And I've tried out every browser ever made for the Mac:

<http://darrel.knutson.com/mac/www/browsers.html>

I'd like to see OW support Piclens, instead of having to resort to 
another browser on occasion. But overall OW is still the browser out 
there.

Darrel
--

-- 
Internet Trainer & Translator  <http://darrel.knutson.com/>
Roedingsmarkt 14                <mailto:darrel <at> knutson.com>
20459 Hamburg, Germany          GSM/D2: +49 (0)173/2088764
Bill Wisse | 13 Feb 2009 05:14
Picon

Re: So, is this list dead?


On 10/02/2009, at 2:44 AM, Darrel E. Knutson wrote:

>> I wonder how many people on this list use OmniWeb as their
>> primary web browser.

With all those messages on the list, I thought I go back to OW as my  
main browser.
But I'm sorry to say that I went back to Opera 10 beta.
OW is sooooooooo much slower then Opera, in fact I think there is no  
browser as fast as Opera at the moment!

Greetings from
/bill at 169 west , 19 south.
Disclaimer: Any errors in spelling, tact, or fact are
transmission errors
Bill Wisse | 10 Feb 2009 19:19
Picon

Re: So, is this list dead?


On 10/02/2009, at 1:13 AM, Beth Katz wrote:

> I wonder how many people on this list use OmniWeb as their
> primary web browser. I do, but I need to use Firefox to post
> in the Comcast User Help Forums. Those folks need help unlike
> the majority of OmniWeb users.

I've used OW as my main browser for a long time. Recently I did go  
back to Opera 10 beta because it is so fast,
so OW is my second choice at the moment.

Safari , I only use when I'm in a hurry because it comes up in a wink.

Firefox, I don't use because it is as slow as a turtle.

Greetings from
/bill at 169 west , 19 south.
Disclaimer: Any errors in spelling, tact, or fact are
transmission errors
Michel Mélin | 10 Feb 2009 17:13
Picon
Favicon

Re: So, is this list dead?


Le 10 févr. 09 à 13:13, Beth Katz a écrit :

> I wonder how many people on this list use OmniWeb as their
> primary web browser.

OW is my primary browser since/for a long time.
Tom Ritch | 10 Feb 2009 17:22
Picon

Re: So, is this list dead?

On Feb 10, 2009, at 8:13 AM, Michel Mélin wrote:

> Le 10 févr. 09 à 13:13, Beth Katz a écrit :
>
>> I wonder how many people on this list use OmniWeb as their
>> primary web browser.
>
> OW is my primary browser since/for a long time.

I'm here listening (listing?) I only use OW for browsing. 
  
Jared Earle | 10 Feb 2009 17:04
Picon

Re: So, is this list dead?

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Beth Katz <katz <at> cs.millersville.edu> wrote:
> I wonder how many people on this list use OmniWeb as their
> primary web browser.

I do, but only at work where I have a 23" monitor. At home, on a
MacBook, I use Webkit.

--

-- 
 Jared Earle :: There is no SPORK
 jearle <at> gmail.com :: http://jearle.eu
 Hosting :: http://cat5.org
 Blog :: http://blog.23x.net
Jan Erik Moström | 10 Feb 2009 13:29
Picon

Re: So, is this list dead?

On 10 feb 2009, at 13:13, Beth Katz wrote:

> I wonder how many people on this list use OmniWeb as their
> primary web browser.

Both yes and no, I've used it as my primary browser for a long time  
but currently I'm using Firefox more than OW. Why? The plugins - the  
ad-blocking works better, script control works better, various grease  
money scripts. I like OWs handling of cookies better and the  
integration with the rest of my machine.

				jem
W. Ian Blanton | 10 Feb 2009 07:47
Favicon

Re: So, is this list dead?

	Thanks Troy!

	You know, I must have known that and just forgotten. Again, thanks!

On Feb 10, 2009, at 1:19 AM, Troy Brandt wrote:
> Hi,
> Most OmniWeb discussions happen on our forum here:
> http://forums.omnigroup.com/forumdisplay.php?f=3
> But people are of course welcome to use the list still, there are  
> still a good number of subscribers. People just tend to prefer the  
> forums I think.

                                                                                        -Ian
--

-- 
W. "Ian" Blanton, Director of Consulting Group, Tech Superpowers, Inc.
Technology for Genius (tm). All Mac, all the way.
252 Newbury St. Boston, MA. 02116  http://www.techsuperpowers.com
Phone: 617.267.9716x705       Net:     Ian <at> techsuperpowers.com

Gmane