Ralf Döblitz wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 10:10:16AM +0000, Charles Lindsey wrote:
> [...]
> > Well I vote for Reply-To set to the list (since this is primarily a
> > discussion list).
>
> And I vote against any Reply-To munging. Just get yourself a real
> mailreader, set up your mailing list subscriptuions in it and all is
> well. If you don't want to do that, don't keep other people from using
> Reply-To for exactly the purpose it was designed for.
I too vote for standard Reply-To.
The fact that the subject is [faq-maintainers] tells me I'm looking at a list.
The point that Steve makes on
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
is quite valid.
As to a real reader, I use 3 mailreaders, two of them also as newsreaders.
It's pretty much a question of personal taste.
I too think that a preference for non-programmable mailreaders isn't argument
enough to pervert the standard.
We aren't trying to build traffic here, we're here to help each other but the
point about mistakenly sending a personal message to the list is IMHO the
more important.
Besides, creating a 4 letter alias for the list address isn't that hard,
whereas digging the headers for a X-ReplyTo would be quite a pain.
*************************************************************
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