Michael B. Trausch writes: > Permit me to rephrase so that you understand what I said:
I understand what you said. You are not responding to what I said, except emotionally. Stripped of emotional language, the fact is that there are use cases for Reply-To which Reply-To munging overrides. The fact is that the RFCs have consistently, despite *decades* of argument along the lines you proposed, reserved use of the Reply-To field to the originator, who is clearly the author(s) or agent of same. (Otherwise Message-ID-munging would be similarly appropriate.) The fact is that your proposal takes the right to use the Reply-To field *or have the From field used /automatically/ as the destination for personal replies* in all circumstances, a right clearly delegated to the originator by the RFCs, away in *some* circumstances, for the convenience of third parties. Please respond to those facts rather than assuming I don't understand what you're talking about. _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9
