Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
Personally, I would roll out the new buttons and see if this helps.
This is an issue where there probably is no best answer because I see the same sort of issue in e-mail, for example, where many people don't get the difference between "Reply" and "Reply All." I cannot count the number of times over the years where I have received messages that were clearly intended to be a straight reply to the e-mail message sender but that were sent out using "Reply All." In a lot of those cases almost certainly from a dropdown button where the incorrect selection has been made or because the sender's habit is "reply all" as a rule and they accidentally didn't make a "reply" exception.
Forums are different because you never do address messages directly, yourself, like you do in e-mail and there is no way to tweak a reply to go to any specific person other than the original sender, via what in most other venues I haunt would be under a private messaging system but an individual e-mail message is used here, or to the group as a whole. There is no mechanism, like in e-mail, where one could do a "Reply All"/"Reply to Group" and then edit out specific group members. I hasten to add that I'm not proposing that this mechanism should ever be introduced. In the context of an online forum the two options should either be to reply to everyone in public or to reply to the sender in private (if that feature is turned on).
I found the change in the test system to the tri-colored buttons at the bottom of the reply compose area to be a major improvement, and since it's been there I've not done a single accidental "reply to group" when I meant to "reply to sender." That was not true when the options marched across in a monochrome line.
A lot of what appears to be progress is just so much technological rococo. ~ Bill Gray