Standlee, Kevin wrote: > [For the benefit of the entire audience.] Many mailing lists -- > including most of those that I'm subscribed to -- are set up so that the > default reply-to is the list, not the sender. This does occassionally > lead to someone who meant to reply privately sending an embarassing > message to the entire list. > > On the other hand, many people object strongly to "reply-to munging," > and indeed, one of the lists to which I'm subscribed (one of the L.A.con > IV staff mailing lists) had someone recently had a spate of messages > triggered by a member dropping off because as a matter of principle he > refuses to be a member of a list that sets the default reply-to as the > list, rather than the sender.
On the gripping hand, some of us despise the habit of using "Reply All" because it sets the To line of the reply to "To: original-sender, list-alias", thus causing the person who sent the first message to get two copies of every reply. A better way, IMO, is to have lists set "Reply-To" to a nonsense string (preferably one that will trigger an immediate error message in as many mail programs as possible when you try to send to it), thus forcing every person who composes a reply to set the To: line explicitly.
