Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Suggestion\.\.\.\.\.\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Suggestion\.\.\.\.\.\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] Suggestion..... (score: 1): Author: "Jim Dawson" <jdawson@jasystems.com>; Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 12:27:20 -0500; Can we change this group so when you click "Reply" in your mail client it goes to the group and not to the individual? If it is important enough to post to the group, most likely so is the response.; /archives//html/Amps/2009-10/msg00041.html (6,880 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] Suggestion..... (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 13:55:47 -0400; No, leave it alone. "Reply to sender" is the default for the MailMan list software and goes a long way to preventing the "oops!" of an accidental "reply to all." Most e-mail software includes both "r; /archives//html/Amps/2009-10/msg00043.html (8,007 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] Suggestion..... (score: 1): Author: Bob Nielsen <n7xy@clearwire.net>; Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 11:10:35 -0700; I agree, but when I used mutt for email, it could be configured to have "reply", "reply to all" or "reply to list" which I thought was nice. It is strictly text-based (using curses) and most people p; /archives//html/Amps/2009-10/msg00044.html (9,359 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] Suggestion..... (score: 1): Author: "Mike" <noddy1211@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 11:11:35 -0700; All these old style groups seem to default the same way, I wish they would change it to default replies to the group as well. Mike Can we change this group so when you click "Reply" in your mail clie; /archives//html/Amps/2009-10/msg00045.html (7,945 bytes)
5. Re: [Amps] Suggestion..... (score: 1): Author: Roger <sub1@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 15:37:55 -0400; I'd like to see it changed as most of my reflectors are that way. When I hit reply I want to send ONLY to the reflector, but I have to edit the addresses on nearly all posts because that goes only to; /archives//html/Amps/2009-10/msg00048.html (9,562 bytes)
6. Re: [Amps] Suggestion..... (score: 1): Author: "Jim Dawson" <jdawson@jasystems.com>; Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 15:09:45 -0500; It was merely a suggestion, I guess it is a only minor annoyance for the original poster to get the post twice when reaponders use "Reply all". No, leave it alone. "Reply to sender" is the default fo; /archives//html/Amps/2009-10/msg00049.html (8,959 bytes)
7. Re: [Amps] Suggestion..... (score: 1): Author: Ron Youvan <ka4inm@tampabay.rr.com>; Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2009 21:40:19 +0000; I can recommend adding "amps" to your address book, then you only need highlight the senders address and type your abbreviation for amps. (which could be "a" or "am" or whatever you wish) Just as I; /archives//html/Amps/2009-10/msg00052.html (7,862 bytes)
8. Re: [Amps] Suggestion..... (score: 1): Author: "Fern" <crc@cyberlink.ca>; Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2009 21:14:30 -0600; No god forbid as this would be like they do on the Icom reflector which is not standard. _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.; /archives//html/Amps/2009-10/msg00059.html (8,041 bytes)
9. Re: [Amps] Suggestion..... (score: 1): Author: George Fremin III <geoiii@kkn.net>; Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 09:40:50 -0700; Since I am the "list owner" (which does not mean much really) I will weigh in here and say that I do not feel that would be a good change and I would not make that change without almost everyone on t; /archives//html/Amps/2009-10/msg00060.html (8,660 bytes)
10. Re: [Amps] Suggestion..... (score: 1): Author: "Gary K9GS" <garyk9gs@wi.rr.com>; Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 14:21:31 -0500; Hello George, I like it the way it is.....people just have to be disciplined to using "reply all" when they want their response to go to the list...which they should in most cases. I've always made i; /archives//html/Amps/2009-10/msg00063.html (10,809 bytes)
11. Re: [Amps] Suggestion..... (score: 1): Author: Jack Parker <vhfplus@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 13:22:26 -0700; Amen, George! I had just that experience with the ICOM reflector. Nothing untoward got to the list, just a business transaction, but I did *not* check the address(es) first before hitting send...just; /archives//html/Amps/2009-10/msg00064.html (12,187 bytes)
12. Re: [Amps] Suggestion..... (score: 1): Author: Bill Russell <wgr@roadrunner.com>; Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 16:49:07 -0400; Let me try this........... Bill Russell _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps; /archives//html/Amps/2009-10/msg00065.html (13,368 bytes)
13. Re: [Amps] Suggestion..... (score: 1): Author: Roger <sub1@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 17:13:43 -0400; I guess it just depends on what you are used to. As most of the reflectors I use are different than this one I've ended up posting a number of private replies to the group, yet I've not done one on a; /archives//html/Amps/2009-10/msg00066.html (8,146 bytes)
14. Re: [Amps] Suggestion..... (score: 1): Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2009 19:21:45 -0700; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: I am also the "list owner" of another contesting.com list - RTTY - and I have to politely disagree with George on this. I find it quite annoying to have to edit the "to" fiel; /archives//html/Amps/2009-10/msg00073.html (9,048 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 14
Page: [1]