"M. Fioretti" <mfiore...@nexaima.net> writes: >Karl, >in this message from you there was one Reply-To header, set to: > > Karl Fogel <kfo...@red-bean.com>, > liberationtech <liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu>
Thank you. Then we're at least avoiding the "can't find my way back home" problem, which is good. >about the general issue: most decent email clients can recognize >messages from mailing lists and allow their user to ignore the >reply-to header. Which is what I (and many other people) do, on this >and any other mailing list I'm subscribed to. You may set it to >mickeymo...@mouseton.com, and by default my replies to all messages >sent to liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu would still go ONLY to >liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu Oh, none of this is an issue for me personally. My mail client is heavily scripted & customized already. I'm worried, instead, that someone else will send a private message (say a private reply for my eyes only) and have it accidentally go to the list. I've seen this happen on other lists that add the list address to Reply-to, and it's not pretty. In other words, the failure mode of the current setting is much more severe than the failure mode of "leave Reply-to alone", since if someone accidentally sends a message privately that should have been public, the recipient can always point this out and then the sender can simply re-post to the list. And that failure mode makes everyone vulnerable, since what the private responder is saying might contain information that is private about me too! But that's always been the argument against the current setting. If the vote is that we live with this danger, then that's the vote. At least we're only adding to reply-to, never destroying any data. -Karl -- Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
