Since our listserve is a LINUX beastie the new link is an attempt to
disable whitemail.
It's an experiment whose operation monitoring I ask members of the
list to provide. Offlist reports to yours truly will be read with
interest and shared with the IT person who formulates the list;-)
--
Henry
On 8 Mar 2004 at 15:29, Brad Beyenhof wrote:
> It seems that today the list has been set with a Reply-to header of
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" Now, we don't need to "Reply All" or manually type
> in the Finale list address.
I've never quite understood why more email programs don't have the
same user
On Monday, March 8, 2004, at 03:53 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 08 Mar 2004, at 06:29 PM, Brad Beyenhof wrote:
I liked the old way, since people who only get the digest are more
likely to get responses quickly through personal email...
That sounds like a rather weak reason to me. No offense t
On 08 Mar 2004, at 06:29 PM, Brad Beyenhof wrote:
It seems that today the list has been set with a Reply-to header of
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" Now, we don't need to "Reply All" or manually type
in the Finale list address.
Hey! Wow! That's great!
In another thread, now, established practice has ca
It seems that today the list has been set with a Reply-to header of
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" Now, we don't need to "Reply All" or manually type
in the Finale list address.
In another thread, now, established practice has caused a poster to
"slip up" and send a message to the list twice. I liked th
