> Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 08:50:18 -0500 > To: "arkenstone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "VNC List" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > From: John Kaufmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Is this an issue of posting etiquette? > > At 20:12 +1100 030203, arkenstone wrote: > >I'll have to agree with all of this, specifically what John Kaufmann said. > >It's quite often more difficult to follow a thread on this list, due to the > >whole reply-to header. > > > >As i only joined the list in the last month or so, would anyone be able to > >enlighten me as to why this change was made? > > The majordomo that is used to administer the list was not able to > prevent "reply-to" loops from dumb autoresponders. Sometimes people > would set their mail clients to respond with "I will be out of the > office until ..." - which would then loop through the list, sometimes > even with the same mail client responding to its own autoresponse <!> > - and the whole list would get the whole autoresponding loop. > > Wez felt that dropping the "Reply-To:" header would stop those > conspiracies of dumb mail clients and dumb majordomo - and it has at > least done that. Other lists are able to use "Reply-To:" to maintain > threading without having to yield to dumb autoresponders, but I can't > fault Wez, who already has a full plate, for not researching the > differences. > -- > John
If that's the only way to get rid of those endless autoresponse loops (with the amount of research that can be afforded), then perhaps it's a necessary evil. No free lunch. I guess the list members have picked their poison. Fred -- Fred Ma, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Carleton University, Dept. of Electronics 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario Canada, K1S 5B6 _______________________________________________ VNC-List mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
