On Sat, 2003-01-25 at 07:37, Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder wrote: > On Sam, 2003-01-25 at 11:16, Alexander Hvostov wrote: > > > In another email, I suggested another header to accomplish this, > > explicitly requesting that list replies be CC'd to the sender. Something > > like: > > > > X-CC-On-List-Replies: <user@example.com> > > > > How's that sound? > > I don't really get it. You complain that M-F-T is badly thought out and > supported by only very few MUAs, and propose another header to solve the > same problem that is supported by even fewer MUAs? I'm just throwing it out as an idea, not asking people to implement it. That idea is a header that's not identical to Reply-To, unlike M-F-T; see another email I just sent. Alex. -- PGP Public Key: http://aoi.dyndns.org/~alex/pgp-public-key -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS d- s:++ a18 C++(++++)>$ UL+++(++++) P--- L+++>++++ E---- W+(+++) N- o-- K+ w--- !O M(+) V-- PS+++ PE-- Y+ PGP+(+++) t* 5-- X-- R tv b- DI D+++ G e h! !r y ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part