On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 06:38:57PM -0600, Callum Lerwick wrote: > > What does this have to do with Reply-To munging? Sounds like the person > > wants to get direct replies as well as replies to the list. Perhaps a > > request to be Cc:'d on subsequent posts would make sense, yet, that > > would be a user-request wouldn't it? Something useful for the Reply-To: > > field. > > Ummm. Everything sent to the list gets sent to you. Isn't that the point? Yes, but you may choose to filter high-volume lists into a separate mailbox, but want replies to your messages to that list to also land in your main inbox so you see them sooner. (Not a hypothetical situation - I do this with the Debian lists.) > Maybe this makes more sense on a list that doesn't require subscription. > But how many are in the days of SPAM? The Debian lists accept posts from non-subscribers. I'm not sure whether this list does or not. I also run a couple of them for committees and the board of a local nonprofit, since it doesn't make sense to require someone to subject themselves to all of a committee's business just to ask them a question and the board list is restricted to board members only. > Rule one of the internet is the internet is full of fucktards. > Rule two of the internet is the internet is full of fucktards. > Rule three of the internet is the internet is full of fucktards. Feeling a little redundant today, Callum? > > I would say it's more like our situation. No one makes any decisions. > > The debate flares up, but nothing is done. The environment that rules > > is the one that is initially set up. > Thats because the majority is in favor of leaving it the hell alone. IOW, the majority do _not_ favor reply-to: munging. Nor do they disfavor it. They're just too lazy to care. Which is exactly what the person you were replying to (but then chopped out the attribution - naughty, naughty!) was saying. There's a vocal pro-munging minority and a vocal anti-munging minority, but the vast majority of people show no sign of giving a damn one way or the other. -- When we reduce our own liberties to stop terrorism, the terrorists have already won. - reverius Innocence is no protection when governments go bad. - Tom Swiss