"Mr. Brigham Young" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In actual truth I would argue that adding a Reply-To: is the Correct way
> to implement the needed behavior for two reasons:
>
> 1. From: should reference the person that wrote the email.
> 2. A response in the majority of cases should go to [EMA
On Sat, 11 May 2002 22:23:12 -0700 (PDT)
"Mr. Brigham Young" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Regarding your comment I would have to say that the argument presented
> in the document you referenced is spurious for the following reasons.
(snip)
The reasons for not munging the Reply-To header presente
forwarded because my current email address wasn't subscribed. :)
- Forwarded message from Derek Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -
From: Derek Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: BlackBox Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 01:42:08 -0400
Sub
Hi Jan,
No Offense whatsover :)
Regarding your comment I would have to say that the argument presented in
the document you referenced is spurious for the following reasons.
1. The author says they still use elm. ;-)
2. The Author refers to a "Principle of Minimal Munging" (in quotes)
implying
On 12-May-2002 Mr. Brigham Young wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I use majordomo at work and I know you can set it up to add a
>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> header to the mail when majordomo sends it on to the list subscribers.
> That way you hit reply and it goes back to majordomo without having
"Mr. Brigham Young" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> I use majordomo at work and I know you can set it up to add a
>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> header to the mail when majordomo sends it on to the list subscribers.
> That way you hit reply and it goes back to majordomo without
