Re: [OT] Re: Test mail to gnupg.user

2010-06-13 Thread MFPA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi On Sunday 13 June 2010 at 6:12:54 PM, in , Ingo Klöcker wrote: > Hmm, I never read anywhere that this would be the > etiquette of this group. It's certainly not mentioned > on the listinfo page of gnupg-users. Also, most people > seem to repl

Re: [OT] Re: Test mail to gnupg.user

2010-06-13 Thread Sonja Michelle Lina Thomas
> > SPAM (in capital letters) is a canned precooked meat product made by > the Hormel Foods Corporation. (-; > Which is pretty good when sliced thin, pan fried and put on a toasted English muffin with spicy mustard! ___ Sonja Michelle Lina Thomas so

Re: [OT] Re: Test mail to gnupg.user

2010-06-13 Thread MFPA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi On Sunday 13 June 2010 at 7:37:33 PM, in , Jerry wrote: > While it would appear that most users direct their > replies back to the list, there are a few morons who > feel it is their sworn duty to CC: the OP. After my first few postings to th

Re: [OT] Re: Test mail to gnupg.user

2010-06-13 Thread Jerry
On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 19:12:54 +0200 Ingo Klöcker articulated: > Hmm, I never read anywhere that this would be the etiquette of this > group. It's certainly not mentioned on the listinfo page of > gnupg-users. Also, most people seem to reply to list only. While it would appear that most users di

Re: [OT] Re: Test mail to gnupg.user

2010-06-13 Thread Ingo Klöcker
On Sunday 13 June 2010, MFPA wrote: > Hi > > > On Sunday 13 June 2010 at 10:03:00 AM, in > , Ingo Klöcker wrote: > > IMNSHO, it's not up to the mailing list admins to > > dictate where replies to my posts should go. Therefore, > > the mailing list software should not touch the Reply-to > > header

[OT] Re: Test mail to gnupg.user

2010-06-13 Thread MFPA
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi On Sunday 13 June 2010 at 10:03:00 AM, in , Ingo Klöcker wrote: > IMNSHO, it's not up to the mailing list admins to > dictate where replies to my posts should go. Therefore, > the mailing list software should not touch the Reply-to > header.