Re: setting reply-to in freetype lists...

[Tom Kacvinsky]

> 
> > Has this can of worms been opened before?
> 
> As far as I know, not on this list...
> 

Hopefully, it won't get out of hand.  I have seen some ugly flame wars
start over this.  But in case it does, the list has my apolgies for
opening pandora's box.  Did everything one go buy their Nomex undies?

> >I usually catch sending replies to the original author *and* the
> >list, but sometimes I miss it.  So some people get duplicate
> >messages from me (and we all know that Just doesn't like that ;)
> 
> [ Just to get this straight, I don't mind getting duplicates _at_ _all_
> if it's a reply to a post of mine... ]
>

Yes, I figured as much, but I couldn't resist the jibe!

>
> >Kidding aside, would it be possible to get the freetype list
> >messages to come out of the list manager with the reply-to header
> >set to the appropriate list?
> 
> Uhm, please no. This makes it harder to reply *off* list. There's a
> whole web page somewhere that lists all the reasons why mucking with
> the reply-to header is evil... (Not that I care much about evil-ness,
> it's just that the current setup is most flexible -- at least for me.)
>

This is OK by me.  As I said, I have a procmail recipe that does this,
so I am all set.  I just wish an implementation of sieve would get out
in the UNIX world (Mulberry for the Macintosh is going to support it,
I believe)

For those who don't know what sieve is: it is an IETF (draft?)
standard for mail message filtering.

Tom