Hello Jan, On Sun, 2 May 2004 11:21:15 -0400 GMT (02/05/2004, 22:21 +0700 GMT), Jan Rifkinson wrote:
>> I would guess a stray reply template is the culprit. With one "%TO=" >> macro too many. JR> Here's the appropriate portion of my reply template. I always thought JR> the %REPLYTO applied to the sender & the %To is fairly standard, isn't JR> it? Do you see a problem with this template? I think the %ReplyTo JR> macro is now placing that information on the To: line. What do you JR> think? JR> %REPLYTO="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" This one is redundant. The list server will override any Reply-To with the TBUDL address anyway. JR> %To=%OTOADDR I see no problem here. Unless for some reason there is already a TO recipient, then this will add the OTOADDR to is. Therefore, I use %To=""%TO=%OTOADDR The first one clears the field. But then, this time your message contained the TBUDL address only once. -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. Die meisten Menschen haben einander verdient. Message reply created with The Bat! 2.10.01 under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build 2222 A using a Pentium P4 1.7 GHz, 256MB RAM ________________________________________________ Current version is 2.10.03 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
