On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 09:08:50AM +1100, Tony Langdon via luv-main wrote: > On 25/11/2015 9:13 PM, Erik Christiansen via luv-main wrote: > > > Interestingly, 'r', 'g', and 'L' all work correctly on Tony's posts, & > > Rick's, and Brian's. (And yet, Reply-To: is similar in all. Tried it 5 > > times, and can't for the life of me see why yours behave differently.) > > Same result here. Only Craig's posts don't allow me to reply to all. > This function worked properly with your post just now, Erik.
now that's really bizarre. I can understand why my MUA (mutt) has difficulty with Reply-To (because I have a procmail rule to rename that header to X-Old-Reply-To to defeat the Reply-To munging of some lists, so there is no Reply-To header for mutt to use). But there's no reason why a message I send to this list should be any different to a message sent by someone else. I do make a habit of trimming the CC: header unless I really want to send a CC to someone, which doesn't happen often - I usually want to send either a list reply or a private reply, almost never both. craig -- craig sanders <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
