On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 19:55:01 -0500, Cael Abal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Bruno, did you read the objections raised in that link I provided? I > know how Mail-Followup-To works. I also understand there are unresolved > problems with it.
My argument was that it was better than not using it. It isn't a perfect solution. > > This will be my last post on the subject, but please consider that MFT > is *not* a standard (and as far as I know hasn't shown up in an RFC > since the late '90s), supported by only a handful of MUAs... And the > (default), polite course of action has historically been not to CC folks > in mailinglist posts. I disagree that not cc'ing senders is the default in general. I think it depends on the kind of list, and the ones I use it is typically preferred that you cc senders unless they indicate that they shouldn't be using a mail-followup-to header. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
