I just have to say since I managed to spawn such an impressive thread that it was 100% user error on my part ... The real problem is that I have a number of friends that use reply-to: and actually would like things sent there instead, so I have developed the habit of just hitting return whenever my helpful mailer decides to ask me that fateful question. Of course I could have (as Chuck so helpfully suggests) double checked the place where I was sending it as well, so I think that I can pretty confidently take full credit for this one. If someone would like to blame the list, don't let me get in the way, but in reality it's just a blunder of habit. Cheers, all! (P.S. yes, this one really is intended to go to the list :-P) On Thu, 9 May 2002, Josh Huber wrote:
"Charles R. Anderson" <cra@WPI.EDU> writes:
Yes. They should check the To: and Cc: headers for every single message they send, whether it is a personal message or not, on a mailing list or not. I don't think this is unreasonable.
Well, okay. I almost always check the headers, but it is nice to have consistency -- hit the reply key to send a message to the author of the message you're reading. Hit the followup key to reply to everyone (or, perhaps the Mail-Followup-To header contents). Hit the list reply key to only reply to the list. I like the idea that from list to list, you get a consistant behavior, with no surprises. (well, very few hopefully ;)
huber> of them perform reply-to munging. So...I'm not sure what huber> lists you're subscribed to, but I find it odd that the huber> statistics are so
The ISC's lists such as dhcp-server.
Okay. Perhaps my stats are skewed because of the large number of lists from lists.debian.org and lists.linuxppc.org which I'm subscribed to. After checking I did notice one other list which does this (making it 4 total, ~10%).
I don't really care either way, since I always check the To: and Cc: headers before hitting the final send button. In addition, my mailer asks "Reply to foo@bar.baz?" when a reply-to exists.
Indeed, this is sensible behavior and would avoid most mistakes. However, maybe most people are not using a sensible mailer? (cheap-shot)
If people feel that it would be more appropriate to not munge the header in the mailing list software, it wouldn't bother me if it was changed.
Well, you have my vote to have it removed. Of course, it's ultimately up to the list admin.
-- Lee Keyser-Allen lkeyser@wpi.edu WPI CS 2002