Re: qmail list reply-to

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Sat, Oct 07, 2000 at 05:33:34PM -0400,
  Russell Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Charles McLagan writes:
>  > Now, one can trash Microsoft, or Netscape, or whoever
>  > makes the MUA, but the bottom line is, this is how they
>  > work and this is how 99% of users would use them even
>  > if there were a reply-to-recipient choice.
>  > 
>  > So the question is: is there a sensible (or kludgey, hack,
>  > yet sufficient) way to cope with it today?
> 
> No.  Reply-to-Recipient is necessary and sufficient.

And what if the sender isn't on the list?