Re: Adding a user to a group
On Tue, Jul 17, 2001 at 08:21:32AM -1000, Joseph Dane wrote:
> >>>>> "Dave" == Dave Sherohman <esper@sherohman.org> writes:
> Dave> 1) Yes, there is a reason. Do a search on "reply-to considered
> Dave> harmful" for more information.
>
> do a search for 'reply-to munging considered useful', for what I feel
> is a much more convincing argument.
Seen it, and I still fall to the 'harmful' side for the simple reason
that reply-to makes mistakes more potentially problematic. If you
forget to include the list when you intended to, it's no big deal -
just resend. If you send a reply to the list that's intended to be
private, there are plenty of cases where it could be somewhat
embarrassing and a few where it could be outright Bad.
> really. I'm on about the same number, and the split is more like
> 40/60 for me, in favor of not setting reply-to.
Well, that's still not "most" lists using it, which was the point I
disputed anyhow...
> also, most of the
> lists I admin set reply-to, at the request of the people on the
> lists.
I host a dozen lists, all but one of which are extremely-low-volume,
and have never had anyone ask about reply-to on any of them. But
that just proves that not all users like/want the same thing.
> in the end, the 'right' policy is the one chosen by the list admins,
> since they have the right to set whatever policy they want. but this
> does seem like an issue that just won't go away, ever.
Agreed on both points. _Maybe_ it would go away if all common MUAs
were to implement a reply-to-list feature, but even then, I doubt it.
Reply to: