On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, Anssi Hannula (AH) wrote:
AH> > Hi Johannes,
AH> >
AH> > Could you please change the following mailman-option "Where are
AH> > replies to list messages directed? .." to "This list" (General
AH> > options). It adds the reply-to header to the message with the
AH> > list-address. F*cked up mail-clients like Outlook don't handle the
AH> > replies correctly, and they try to reply directly to the sender,
AH> > instead of replying to the list..
AH>
AH> Doesn't it have a reply-all button, which sets the To&CC correctly?
AH> Or is the "correct" handling something different?
generally speaking, there are two categories of people with regard to the
_wanted_ behaviour of the reply-buttons anf mailing list posts:
1. using "reply" key/button sents a mail to the ML only.
(this _needs_ the reply-to: field to be set to the ML address)
2. using "reply" sends to the sender only
(this _needs_ the reply-to: field to be _not_ set to the ML address)
people from the first category _rarely_ want write a private reply, since
it is about a discussion on a mailing list. in the _very_rare_ occasions
they want to write a private reply, they use "reply all" and then remove
the ML address from the To:/CC: field.
people from the second category always use the "reply all" button/key when
they reply to the ML, sending a copy to the sender as well.
Both categories have (dis)advantages! (I am not going to list them here)
I, for myself, belong to the first category. So I'd prefer the reply-to:
field to be set to the ML-address.
@ML-Admins: Is it possible to have a per-user setting in the ML-software,
which enables the reply-to: field for all posts sent to that user?
That would definitely stop this discussion and be the best solution for
all.
Sergei
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------- -?)
eMail: Sergei.Haller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx /\\
-------------------------------------------------------------------- _\_V
Be careful of reading health books, you might die of a misprint.
-- Mark Twain
