On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 12:40:50 -0700 Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wrong, wrong, wrong. How you can cite 2822 as a reference for reply-to > munging while denouncing 822 is beyond me. It was 822 that had an explicit > reference to mailing lists as an acceptable use of 822. 2822 *removed* that > reference on reply-tos just because of the long-standing debate over reply-to > munging. > > The real question is why List-Post was written in such a way as so that > people could debate it's usefulness as an inidicator of where to send replies > (it has happened, believe me) and why the head-honchos up on high who debate > such standards have gone on record as saying that a list-reply is not needed. To add to the insanity (at least with sylpheed-claws-gtk2) it seems if the Reply To: field contains the posters email address then no matter what you choose (reply, reply to all, reply to mailing list) only the posters email address is supplied, if you want to send a reply to the list you have to add the list address and if you don't want the reply to go to the posters email address you have to remove it. DOH! Later, Seeker -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
