On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Dominique Dumont (DD) wrote: DD> > That's a good question .. Maybe this should be started off as a DD> > separate thread. So that others too can exchange their views.. DD> DD> This has often been subject of flame-war on various mailing lists. DD> DD> Here's a well-thought argument against: DD> DD> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html there are as many arguments _for_ a reply-to set to the list. DD> When a mailing list modifies reply-to, I usually set-up my mail reader DD> to clobber it for the reasons expressed by the author of the DD> reply-to-harmful paper. I do a similar thing "the other way around", set my mail filters to add a reply-to field to mailing list posts. The only perfect solution would be if every subscriber could enable/disable the reply-to header in his settings on the lists management site. (the site where you can define if you want digests or not) Sergei -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- -?) eMail: Sergei.Haller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx /\\ -------------------------------------------------------------------- _\_V Be careful of reading health books, you might die of a misprint. -- Mark Twain
