In a recent note, pAb-032871 said:
> Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 06:29:30 -0700
>
> While I like the IDEA of two comma-separated addresses in the "Reply-To:"
> header, it would mean the origial author gets two copies of every reply.
> Could make for a lot of sorting trouble if you leave your keyboard alone
> a few days. . .
>
Oh, golly, gee! So, if I set Reply-to: to myself, an alias for myself,
a couple accounts that forward to me, and several lists that I belong
to, I might get so many replies. What ever should I do? There's no
practical way to prevent this and still respect the author's intent
with respect to Reply-to. Any attempt to do so flouts Gwyn's Maxim:
"Unix was not designed to stop people from doing stupid things,
because that would also stop them from doing clever things."
--Doug Gwyn
> What about two headers:
>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-Old-Reply-To: <original address>
>
> All that majordomo would need to do is insert;
> " [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-Old-Reply-To:"
> in between "Reply-To:" and " <original address>". I'm assuming the "X-"
> prefix defines this header as a comment to be ignored.
>
Why all the complexity? Why not merely respect the Reply-to: if
supplied by the author?
-- gil
--
StorageTek
INFORMATION made POWERFUL
; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
