> See also http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html for a
> comprehensive explanation of why munging Reply-To to point to the
> entire list would be Wrong. [I admit that I was puzzled about
> the issue, myself, and thought that it would be a good idea to
> set Reply-To to point to the list, until I read this essay.]
Chip's essay is BS and I have rebutted it repeatedly over the eons,
although I respect Chip greatly (and was proud to assist in his recent
legal battle).
The sensible rule is that lists whose primary purpose is announcements or
inquiries of interest should direct replies to message posters, while lists
whose primary purpose is to act as a discussion forum on some topic or
other should direct replies to the whole list.
A reasonable corollary is that where a poster has set an explicit Reply-To
value, it should be respected (if possible) over the list's default.
What he calls "munging" is nothing more than responsible list management.
The so-called sanctity of the RFC822 header is a red herring - take a look
at any LISTSERV DIGEST (I don't mean the dumb "mime digests" either).
This list is set up correctly, I just had to answer yet-another invocation
of RTMCH.
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe send a message to majordomo@faqs.org as
unsubscribe faq-maintainers fill-in-your-email-address-here
*************************************************************
[
FAQ Archive |
Search FAQ Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet References
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000
]
© Copyright The Internet FAQ Consortium, 1997-2000
All rights reserved