Re: Reply-To (was Re: Proving a point)

From: Anton Cox (A.G.Cox_at_city.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Dec 17 2001 - 03:58:55 PST


On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Stephen Turner wrote:

> I was serious about suggesting the Reply-To: list header, by the way.
> Without it, you have to manually edit the headers in order to reply to the
> list only, which is the thing you most often want to do. Does anyone else
> have a view on this?

I think it is a very bad idea. The second link provided (the one in
favour of reply-to) suggests no reason that is not far outweighed by the
arguments in the first link.

On a list like this, where one often wants to respond privately to the
judge, it can be disastrous to accidentally send to the list. Whereas
to accidentally reply to the sender is much less damaging. Sure, one
has to manually edit the to line - but one has to manually edit the
email as well; a few extra symbols seems neither here nor there.

Also, I know people who have (for various reasons) to use the Reply-To
rather than From line in their own mails. This is destroyed by the
addition of a second Reply-To, making it imposible to contact them (a
point made in the first link and ignored by the second...)

Best Wishes,

     Anton

--
Rule Date: 2001-12-17 12:00:05 GMT


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST