TIFF and LibTiff Mail List Archive


2001.06.18 12:38 "Size limitations.", by Bruno Ledoux
2001.06.21 00:08 "Re: Size limitations.", by Joris Van Damme
2001.06.21 01:42 "Re: Size limitations.", by Joris Van Damme
2001.06.21 02:36 "Re: Size limitations.", by Phillip Crews
2001.06.21 02:58 "Re: Size limitations.", by Bob Friesenhahn

2001.06.21 01:42 "Re: Size limitations.", by Joris Van Damme

As stronger point, IMHO, is that having the list put its own address in the 'to' field increases the likelyhood that interesting and usefull answers get shared, and that is what a mailing list is all about.

> Interesting maybe, but possibly very embarrasing to the poster.


Do you realize your post was addressed to me in person? You're not defending your point of view in front of the mailing list. Or perhaps you are, in a seperate send post, but I cannot tell.

> We
> may see accidental posts like "Hey, I have not heard from you for a
> long time. Are you still sleeping with your secretary?".

Well, while possible, I do think the odds on this are small. There are perhaps a few dozen, or maybe a hundred, subscibers to this mailing list worldwide. Now how big are the odds that I would have any knowledge on your sexlife, for example? And even if I did, then a) I would not put my inside information on it in a mail and/or b) would certainly doublecheck to whom it's addressed.

No really, I don't think so, to put it plain and simple. But I do think that a mailing list with a very small population does benefit from increasing the odds on traffic. I do think that we're all missing out on a lot of interesting TIFF talk.

Anyway, I think we both made our points. We shouldn't argue about it any further, it's plain useless anyway.