On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:46:59 -0500 Jeremy Rosengren <jeremy at rosengren.org> wrote: > This was probably talked about ad nauseum when the change was made, > but I missed it. > > Why is the TCLUG list not configured with a reply-to that sends back > to the list? This is the only mailing list subscription I have for > which I have to do a reply all in order to get the message back to > the list. Oh boy - here we go. Here are two separate viewpoints: http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.mhtml Personally as an amateur MTA admin, the idea of munging the mailing list headers doesn't appeal to me. any MUA worth the trouble will have a "Reply To List" option since the mailing list information is in separate headers, not just the Reply-To - for example on TCLUG: Return-Path: <tclug-list-bounces+josh=trutwins.homeip.net at mn-linux.org> Delivered-To: josh at trutwins.homeip.net Received: (qmail 19215 invoked by uid 5033); 2 Sep 2005 03:52:36 -0000 ^^^^^ yeah! :P <snip> From: Jeremy Rosengren <jeremy at rosengren.org> This is who'd be in the To: address if I hit "Reply To" since there isn't a "Reply-To:" header with TCLUG messages. User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Macintosh/20050716) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ good MUA choice Jeremy. List-Post: <mailto:tclug-list at mn-linux.org> I think this is the one that would tell an MUA to enable a "Reply to List" option. Is it right / wrong? I can't say, but I personally don't care for reply-to munging, but I deal with it on mailing lists that choose to do so. Josh