Put the reply-to header back...
santiago at mr-r.net
Wed Aug 31 21:24:48 MDT 2005
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
> clients to send a direct (or off-list) response if needed and thus
> public ignomy which usually results in awkward requests of
> 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.
More information about the PLUG