In a recent note, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 15:42:58 -0600 (MDT)
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> An interesting experiment: Earlier today I replied to this thread,
> explicitly setting Reply-to: <self> <lynx-dev>. The message failed
> to appear. Twice. I'll try this with merely Reply-to: <self>
> and see what happens.
>
Now that's harsh! I can accept the arguments for providing
Reply-to if none is present; I can't accept overriding the
explicit intention of the author.
And I wonder what happened to the two messages with two
Reply-to: addresses? I'll try a third.
-- gil
--
StorageTek
INFORMATION made POWERFUL
; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
