[chat] Re: [SLUG] Reply-To:?

[Erik de Castro Lopo <erikd-slug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 02 Jul 2003 22:15:10 +1000
Tony Green <tgreen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, 2003-07-02 at 22:07, Richard Heycock wrote:
> > Why is that this list doesn't have the 'Reply-To:' header field set? It
> > would make life much easier, it's a pain in the arse to reply to reply
> > to a list without cc'ing the original sender. Is there a reason for
> > this? am I missing something?
> > 
> 
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
> 
> And let's take it to slug-chat if that doesn't answer it.

OK, here we are.

I do partially agree with the issues raised on this page. 

However, it completely avoids one important aspect. Anybody who who sends 
mail to a list and gets someone replying gets two copies of the reply, one 
direct from the replier and one via the mailing list. 

This, IMO, is a major PITA.

Erik

PS: Tony, did you get two copies of this? :-)
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
  Erik de Castro Lopo  nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Yes it's valid)
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Peter F. Curran : Microsoft. Still delivering a text editor with 
    Win95/98 that can only open a max 64K file, despite being on 
    a machine with an 8Gig HD and 64M of ram....
G Cook: Perhaps, but Notepad is still the most functional program 
    in the whole suite!