On 2004-08-09, Brian Nelson penned:
Unfortunately, those headers are not specified in the relevant RFCs
and are not in wide use outside of Linux and other highly technical
mailing lists. Support for MFT and MCT headers is strictly optional,
so many mail client authors/vendors simply choose not to support them.
Yup. I realize this. I'm just so frustrated. If I request no cc's in
my sig, I get tons of mail telling me that I should use the headers
instead. If I use the headers, I get cc'd. Actually, I got cc'd even
with the request right there in the bloody sig. (I seem to use british
cursewords when frustrated online; don't ask me why.) And I do
understand why this bogus reply-to is not the best solution, but I
figure that it might get the message across. And I guess I figure that
folks who know enough to help me with my questions probably use clients
that respect the headers and handle the reply-to properly, although I
could of course be wrong and yes, it's awfully heavy handed and rather
self-serving at the expense of the other list members.
I guess the socially responsible thing to do is, what -- just put up
with dupes? I guess it's not such a big deal, but it irritates me all
out of proportion to the incidents.