On Sunday 01 February 2004 20:51, Joern Nettingsmeier wrote: > Frank Barknecht wrote: > > Hallo, > > > > Rob hat gesagt: // Rob wrote: > >>Ron's contrite response to my original flame suggests to me that > >>he got bit by the infamous "reply-to: set to mailing list" > >>behavior so many have complained about. > > > > I must have missed this complains, but until now I also missed, that > > the Reply-to is indeed munged. As this is considered bad practice for > > a lot of reasons > > as well as good practice for about the same number of reasons > Yeah, yeah, yeah... > > (search google for "reply-to munging harmful") > > search google for "reply-to munging considered useful" :-D > No thanks, don't have the time... C'mon guys - get a clue - is it really that easy to accidently post a message to a public mailing list? Yes, reply-to should go to the list - but it's also quite patently obvious when a given message is from a mailing list - normally the fact that you get two copies would be a clue --- oh never mind. I guess everyone's configuration is different... Please people, if you have the energy to be outraged about some perceived injustice, then you should have the energy to double-check your recipient list. This is really a non-problem. Larry
