On 2004-08-09, Brian Nelson penned: > > Unfortunately, those headers are not specified in the relevant RFCs > and are not in wide use outside of Linux and other highly technical > mailing lists. Support for MFT and MCT headers is strictly optional, > so many mail client authors/vendors simply choose not to support them.
Yup. I realize this. I'm just so frustrated. If I request no cc's in my sig, I get tons of mail telling me that I should use the headers instead. If I use the headers, I get cc'd. Actually, I got cc'd even with the request right there in the bloody sig. (I seem to use british cursewords when frustrated online; don't ask me why.) And I do understand why this bogus reply-to is not the best solution, but I figure that it might get the message across. And I guess I figure that folks who know enough to help me with my questions probably use clients that respect the headers and handle the reply-to properly, although I could of course be wrong and yes, it's awfully heavy handed and rather self-serving at the expense of the other list members. I guess the socially responsible thing to do is, what -- just put up with dupes? I guess it's not such a big deal, but it irritates me all out of proportion to the incidents. -- monique Ask smart questions, get good answers: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
