On Sun, 26 Feb 2012 18:29:47 -0500, Rich Greenberg wrote: >In article you write: >>On Sun, 26 Feb 2012 17:51:33 -0500, Rich Greenberg wrote: >> >>>In article you write: >>>>On Sun, 26 Feb 2012 10:01:36 -0800, Edward Jaffe wrote: > >>>>>What I see is that the requisite "In-Reply-To:" header element, necessary >>>>>to >>>>>properly thread messages together, is missing from your responses. Is >>>>>there any >>>>>way to fix that? > >[snip] > >>Are you perhaps addressing a different problem from the problem >>(or non-problem, in your perception) that Ed reported? > >Gil et al, >I don't think so, but upon re-reading Ed's query, I see that I could >have been more specific in my reply. > Ed and I think so.
>/confession: I used a canned post that has been posted to the list >several times over the years when this topic has come up. > When has the topic that Ed raised been discussed here previously? (Cite.) A single canned reply does not suffice for all potential problems or subscriber misunderstandings. >Inserting a Reply-To: header by the Listserv is an option that must be >turned on. I think it is turned on, but have no way to verify this. >Its also an option to respect or ignore an existing Reply-To: header. >If a followup is made directly to usenet, its presence depends on the >newsreader used and I think the default is NO. > This has little or nothing to do with the "In-Reply-To:" header that Ed misses. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
