On Tue, 19 Aug 2003, at 2:50am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > BTW, Is there a reason why mailman isn't configured to set the reply-to > header?
Some time back, the list took a vote, and more people voted "harmful" then "useful", and we went with the plurality. To avoid rehashing, here are the two arguments: Reply-To Munging Considered Harmful http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html Reply-To Munging Considered Useful http://www.metasystema.org/essays/reply-to-useful.mhtml -- Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do | | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. | | All information is provided without warranty of any kind. | _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
