On 17/10/2008, at 12.24, Tomasz Ostrowski wrote:
On 2008-10-17 12:13, Mikkel Høgh wrote:You're supposed to use "Reply to all" if you want to reply to the list.Well, I think the most common use case for a mailing list is to reply back to the list, isn't that the whole point?It is a point of having "Reply to all" button. With "reply-to" is ithard to reply to one person, easy to reply to the list. Without it it isboth easy.
But again, how often do you want to give a personal reply only? That is a valid use-case, but I'd say amongst the hundreds of mailing-list replies I've written over the years, only two or three were not sent back to the mailing list.
Personally I find it annoying that I get two copies of each reply to one of my posts, one that is filtered into the mailinglist folder because it has the correct X-Mailing-List header and the other just sits there in my inbox, wasting both bandwidth and disk space in the process.So set reply-to in messages you send by yourself - it will be honored.
Yay, even more manual labour instead of having the computers doing the work for us. What's your next suggestion, go back to pen and paper?
Besides, the if the Reply-To thing is so dangerous, why do most other mailing lists do it?for i in Windows MySQL IE Sweets Alcohol etc.; do echo "If using $i is so dangerous, why do most do it?" done
Well, my point is that Reply-To: is only dangerous if you're not careful. Not so with the other examples you mention :)
If you're writing something important, private and/or confidential, don't you always check before you send? You'd better, because a small typo when you selected the recipient might mean that you're sending love-letters to your boss or something like that :)
<<attachment: smime.p7s>>
