On 23 Nov 2020, at 15:40, Richard Damon <rich...@damon-family.org> wrote:
> On 11/23/20 5:27 PM, Jaroslaw Rafa wrote:
>> Dnia 23.11.2020 o godz. 11:49:39 D'Arcy Cain pisze:
>>> If someone replies to a mailing list and copies the sender then that
>>> person gets two copies. The above recipe avoids that.
>> If someone gets two copies - a direct one and the mailing list one - then
>> he/she knows that the sender has replied both to author and to the list and
>> can instruct the sender not to do it. With the above recipe, the recipient
>> doesn't even know about that.
>>
>> Moreover, it breaks the continuity of threads on mailing lists, because it's
>> unpredictable which copy will arrive first, and if only the direct copy is
>> left, the reply will go only to the sender and not to the mailing list. Thus
>> some messages are missing from lists.
>
> You CAN still reply to the list from the private copy, you won't have a
> 'Reply-to-List' opiton, because of the lack of list headers, but
> 'Reply-All' will still work.
>
> It just becomes a bit harder to reply back JUST to the list. Your need
> Reply-All and then editing the list of recipients.
Or you use procmail/Sieve to add a reply-to header to messages that have the
mailing list email in the headers.
--
"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of
complete fools.: - Douglas Adams
