Hello, > 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. > These "well-thoughts" arguments are not really well thought in my eyes. I subscribed to the mailing list, because I want to get mails from the mailing list and I want to send mails to it. So the mails I get are from the mailing list, so I do not see any real reasen why a reply-to should not go to the mailing 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. > My mail reader (thunderbird) is not able to do that, so most time I made a reply, it does not go to the list, because I forget to change the mail-adress. And thats really annoying. > 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) > > Great idea ! -- Helmut Auer, helmut@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
