Put the reply-to header back...

[Grant Robinson]

On Aug 31, 2005, at 8:21 PM, Andy Bradford wrote:

> Thus said Grant Robinson on Wed, 31 Aug 2005 17:57:44 MDT:
>
>> The subject line says  most of it. It hasn't killed  the flame war, so
>> just put it back, and no one will get hurt.
>
> No, but  it does make  it much easier  for folks with  intelligent 
> email
> clients to send a direct (or off-list) response if needed and thus 
> avoid
> public ignomy  which usually  results in  awkward requests  of 
> apologies
> from the sender.

If anyone was going to reply saying "get rid of the reply-to for good", 
it would be Andy. :)  However, we've gone over this many times, and it 
always comes down to the fact that most of the time (99%), people want 
to reply to the list and _not_ the person.  It has nothing to do with 
"intelligent" email clients.  That is why we still have it, because a 
few people with an axe to grind want to remove the reply-to, and 
everyone else wants it to stay.

Plus, Hans removed it to attempt to stop the flame war.  I was pointing 
out it didn't stop it, so put it back the way it was.  So, let's not 
start another flame war centered around the reply-to header.

Grant