Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> writes: > On Sep 10, 2013, at 11:14 PM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > >> Patrick or Cynthia Karl <pck...@mac.com> writes: >> >>>> From: Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com> >>>> To: Patrick or Cynthia Karl <pck...@mac.com> >>> >>>> [deleting billions of lines] >>> >>>> From: James Harkins < jamshar...@gmail.com> >>>> Patrick or Cynthia Karl <pckarl <at> mac.com> writes: >>> >>>> Well, I don't have an answer to the question, but... a reminder... it is >>>> VERY >>>> uncool to quote an *entire digest* when you're replying to only one >>>> message. >>> >>> I am so sorry and will try to do much better. >> >> Maybe the reply-to header of the digest should not even point to the >> list? Replying to a digest makes no sense with regard to message >> threading > > It would be logically consistent since the reply-to header is not set > to the list for non-digest subscribers, but what would be the > alternative? no-reply-lilyp...@gnu.org?
The normal way would be to put it on moderation, with a human deciding whether to silently discard it (appropriate when the address is used for scattering unwanted mail to unsuspecting victims forged into the "From" header) or reply with a canned message. Whether it gets into moderation by being sent to a special address, or by detecting a subject title typical for an unedited reply to a digest (any useful reply would edit the subject title to refer to the actual post rather than the whole digest) is a different question. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
