On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 23:49:04 -0500, Nathan E Norman wrote: >On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 09:36:21PM -0700, Paul 'Baloo' Johnson wrote: >> On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Nathan E Norman wrote: >> >> > I'd take this effort more seriously if participants (like you) honored >> > my Mail-Followup-To: header which explicitly requests a response to the >> > list, and only to the list. Until I see people practicing what they >> > preach, nay demand from the rest of the community, I reserve my >> > skepticism. >> >> I'd really appreciate it if people stopped complaining about getting >> CC'd in on list traffic when they make mention of this in obscure >> headers that most mailers don't support and are unseen unless you >> display full headers. > >So even though "reply to the list only" is the policy of debian lists, >you disagree? > >Real mailers (gnus, mutt) do suport the headers of course :) You use >PINE ...
First, I am using a fairly intelligent mail client (at least for the win world). It does honor "Reply-To:" in the header. This works well for a couple of lists that munge the header. It apparently does not recognize "Mail-Followup-To:" as you used in your mail :^/ So I did as usual and opened the address book. Ah, well. Like you, Nate, I wish for smart mail clients for everyone. Lacking that, maybe some smart posters :-). There is more to the story. I could set a default reply-to address. But, what would it be? Each mail needs a different one. Either I must remember to set that for each post, or the list machinery needs to add it (lots of arguments about that). To tell the truth, I usually forget (bad Gary, bad, bad) So, Balloo, maybe our only recourse is to carp each time we get duplicate replies. A reminder to the more experienced, and a lesson to the newbies, eh? -- gt It is interesting to note that as one evil empire (generic) fell, another Evil Empire (tm) began its nefarious rise. -- me Coincidence? I think not. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]