1 Feb
2004
1 Feb
'04
10:39 p.m.
On Sunday 01 February 2004 20:51, Joern Nettingsmeier wrote:
No thanks, don't have the time...
C'mon guys - get a clue - is it really that easy to accidently post a message
to a public mailing list?
Yes, reply-to should go to the list - but it's also quite patently obvious
when a given message is from a mailing list - normally the fact that you get
two copies would be a clue --- oh never mind. I guess everyone's
configuration is different...
Please people, if you have the energy to be outraged about some perceived
injustice, then you should have the energy to double-check your recipient
list.
This is really a non-problem.
Larry
Frank Barknecht wrote:
Yeah, yeah, yeah...
Hallo,
Rob hat gesagt: // Rob wrote:
as well as good practice for about the same number of reasons
Ron's contrite response to my original flame
suggests to me that
he got bit by the infamous "reply-to: set to mailing list"
behavior so many have complained about.
I must have missed this complains, but until now I also missed, that
the Reply-to is indeed munged. As this is considered bad practice for
a lot of reasons (search google
for "reply-to munging harmful")
search google for "reply-to munging considered useful" :-D