2 Feb
2000
2 Feb
'00
2:15 p.m.
Philip (and the list)
I agree it should now be left as it is. Chip has a compelling and logical
argument, with which I concur.
I, for one, don't like having to rummage thru a message header in order to
find an email address in order to reply to a list member, instead of the
entire list membership.
I don't mind having to send messages in plain text, to accommodate those
members of this list who are "mailer disadvantaged". I believe, however,
that the majority of us have "Reply" and "Reply to All" functions
inherent
in our mailer software. The new way things are set up appears to be a
reasonable compromise to me.
FWIW,
Bill
whdawson(a)mlynk.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
[mailto:owner-classiccmp@classiccmp.org]On Behalf Of liste(a)artware.qc.ca
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2000 9:45 PM
To: Jay West
Cc: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
Subject: RE: regarding the reply address on the list....
On 03-Feb-00 Jay West wrote:
Several people wrote....
> I wonder if you would prefer if the "Respond To" portion should be:
>
> "classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org"
>
> as it used to???? (Well it used to be: "classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu")
> I know that sometimes caused a bit of a problem for posts that were
> supposed to be off list, but I think that is the more intended
> aspect?????
The best text on the subject i've seen is ``Reply-To'' Munging Considered
Harmful by Chip Rosenthal.
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
-Philip