On Sun, 4 Jan 2004, Jeff Kinz wrote: > On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 08:06:53PM -0500, Mark Mielke wrote: > > Note that I, like a number of people, *prefer* to receive two copies. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ right..... > > > > I will send you what you ask for. If you don't like what you are > > asking for, follow the protocol and set Mail-Followup-To:. > > Mark - I've been on the internet for almost 25 years. The proper > practice, when posting to a list has always been to reply to the list > unless the poster ASKS for a direct reply or asks to be replied to off > list. Sending the person two copies of the same email has never been > desirable. I've been on the internet for 16 years. Not quite your 25, but I'm sure you'll grant me that it's more than most, and I likely know my way around the block. I happen to agree with Mark. I *prefer* to receive two copies, and know a lot of people also prefer this... Some mailing lists have a convention of going one way or another, but a hard & fast rule? Nope. If there was, it probably would have made it into RFC1885...[1] (Although it does say to avoid using reply-to headers, which is related...) [1] See previous thread. > You are doing the opposite. Please wake up and learn the difference > between posting to the list and posting to both the list and the > individual. The former is the acceptable default. Depending on where you are. I haven't seen any overriding rules here. Generally, if a person dislikes receiving multiple copies they are free to configure procmail to delete the dups... > If I wanted some other behaviour, then I would set followup-to. > The list email comes to you from the list. Please reply to the list. See earlier comments about "Reply-to" and the RFC... > It is quite easy to do this properly with an email client like mutt. > Please don't ignore the "Reply-To" header. It is specifying what to do > quite properly. It is specifying the acceptable default. > > I believe the Reply-To header, especially in the absence of a > followup-to header does give you the proper instruction. Reply-to is bad and evil. I would be happy if it were removed completely... Krikket
