On Thu, 2016-09-08 at 22:14 -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote: > I strip reply-to headers from all Fedora list messages because some of the > lists mung reply-to headers. Munging reply-to headers seems to be frowned > upon for technical lists. It seems to be more in use where people aren't > used to list behavior and don't understand the difference between reply, > reply to all and reply to list. There is definitely that correlation, I agree. Of course, you have to wonder about the causal relationship between the the list Reply-To: setting, and the users who "don't understand the difference". The main justification for abusing the Reply-To: header is that it is a crutch for precisely those users who are wont to press the wrong button in the mail client because they don't understand the difference between the private and public reply options. And the solution? To confuse them even further by effectively hacking their mail client so that both buttons do the *same* thing. Which basically just helps to make them *more* confused. To say "we must Reply-To:<list> because users are clueless and press the wrong button" is a self-fulfilling prophecy. You aren't doing those users a favour *either*. -- dwmw2
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and open source software and content as a collaborative community.
