Re: Cc: to poster (was Re: OT: less v. more...)
Hi!
I assume that Bolan is on the list? And Ben, are you on -user? Is
there a way to check with this list-agent who is on a list like
majordomo can? Or is it just disabled?
On 03 Aug 2000, Bolan Meek <Bolan.Meek@wcom.com> wrote:
> Ah, good, so, with this assumption, one ought to remove the
> personal To:'s and Cc:'s, unless requested? (Like you did..)
It's what I usually do (with exception to Ben in this case, I got the
impression from the discussion so far that he isn't on -user).
> Brian May wrote:
> > The "mail-copies-to" header does sound good, but I have mixed feelings
> > as to if it really solves the problems.
It can at least solve the problem for the people that are not aware of
what they are doing and using clients that don't know about
mailing-lists at all and therefore don't have a Reply-To-List function.
> > Oh, BTW, Mail-CopiesTo: never is obsolete, use "nobody" instead. See
> > http://www.newsreaders.com/misc/mail-copies-to.html
Thanks for the hint. I don't know why I missed that for I read on just
this page about it ;-)
> OK. So henceforth, my practice will be to remove personal Cc:s
> Thank you.
So I guess we can just close this thread :)
> > I would prefer another header (does the "followup-to" header do
> > this??), that is like "reply-to:", except it works for group
> > followups, rather then private replies. Even better, if it supported
> > mailing lists *and* newsgroups... If the poster hasn't submitted one,
> > the mailing list software could add a default one. If there is already
> > a header, it shouldn't be replaced.
This should be no problem - in a MUA that is aware of lists. I don't
know if there are many besides mutt that could do that?
But I think we get far to far away from the topic of the list. Sadly I
don't know where a good point for discussing this would be? Maybe
news:news.software.readers for Mail-Copies-To: was also discussed there?
> > Another-words, I think it should be up to the sender to specify
> > exactly where the group reply should go. If the sender doesn't say,
> > then the mailing list should be able to specify. This should happen
> > without affecting private replies (so reply-to can't be used).
I double that. It's really a PITA to use such a mis-configured list
(with Reply-To: list set :-/ ).
> One problem I have, is that posts come to me From: the poster,
> and my MUA doesn't respect the Resent-from: header, so if
> I `Reply`, it goes only to the poster, but when I `Reply-all`, the
> list is Cc:ed. I haven't noticed a Followup-to: header (but I
> haven't sought them, either), so I don't know what my MUA
> shall do with those.
Netscape isn't the best MUA to choose from. It lacks many features that
are really useful if you are on several lists, and/or use different
From-Addresses. I'd sugguest you to give mutt[1] a try. It might be a
little hard to find your way to it (it's text-based, some don't like
that), but it's really paying off for it.
Have fun!
Alfie
[1] <http://www.mutt.org/>
- I'm not on -user, this thread was original from -devel
--
Ask not for whom the telephone bell tolls ... if thou art in the
bathtub, it tolls for thee.
Reply to: