On 11 Aug 2005 at 20:59, Aaron Sherber wrote: > At 08:29 PM 08/11/2005, David W. Fenton wrote: > >> That's not the whole picture. People who include the Reply-To can > also >> set the list not to send a duplicate message. . . . > >No, > the list setting only controls duplicated TO: and CC: addresses, >and > the problem is *not* a duplicate address -- it's the recipient > >address plus the list address. > > David, you're missing the point of how this setting works. Please go > back and read my earlier post. If I reply to one of your messages, my > reply has your address in the To field as well as the list address. > When Mailman processes my reply, it sees that your address is in the > To field and also knows that you are a subscriber to the list. So if > 'avoid duplicates' is Yes, Mailman will send my message to everyone on > the list *except you*, because it figures you already got a direct > reply from me.
And that could be a completely incorrect assumption on the part of Mailman, because it can't know what your SMTP server actually did. In any event, I just checked, and I do, in fact, have that feature checked, yet I still get duplicate posts. > But as we've already discussed, this solution is not without problems. And it doesn't actually work reliably. > There are three ways to keep you from getting duplicate emails when > someone replies to one of your posts: > > 1. The poster has to remember to strip out your address. A little > annoying. > > 2. Henry can set Mailman to strip out Reply-To headers before adding > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Easy, and no significant downside. (Brad > mentioned a scenario in which he was on digest and liked also getting > immediate posts replying to his questions, but this assumes that > posters didn't strip out his address from the reply!) > > 3. You can take out your redundant Reply-To header, which serves no > purpose in any message you send, since it's the same as your From > header. Easy, and no downside at all. Yes, there *is* a downside -- I have to change the way my email messages are constructed, and depart from the default configuration for my email reader, one that I've been using for 9 years. If there's only one context in which the configuration of my email client causes any problems, then it's pretty clear that the problem is with that recipient, the Finale mailing list, not with my email configuration. > And this discussion really is taking up far more bandwidth than it's > worth. I agree. I don't understand why misconfigurations of this mailing list continue to be such an issue. -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
