Argh

[Andy Bradford]

Thus said Stuart Jansen on Wed, 30 Apr 2003 11:28:34 MDT:

> I like the  reply-to. I was embarrassed that I've  forgotten to change
> the to multiple times in a short period of time. I consider it 100% my
> fault.

I didn't really say anything about removing the reply-to or changing it.
All I'm saying is that it seems  absurd that people apologize for such a
simple mistake when the mailing  list specifically requests that replies
go to the mailing list. That is  what the reply-to header is designed to
do. Reply-to  is set whenever  the sender wishes  that replies go  to an
address other than  the current sender address. I couldn't  care less if
you accidentally send it to the  list; and I probably wouldn't ever have
known that you did if you didn't apologize.

The thing  that really  bugs me  about reply-to is  that is  replaces my
reply-to if I set one. :-)

Andy
--
GnuPG ID 0xA63888C9 (D2DA 68C9 BB2B 26B4 8204  2219 A43E F450 A638 88C9)
[-----------[system uptime]--------------------------------------------]
 11:55am  up 13 days, 13:26,  1 user,  load average: 1.00, 1.00, 1.00