RE: Reply to header

[David Balazic]

----------
From:   address@hidden:address@hidden on behalf of Buddy Burden[SMTP:address@hidden

Sent:   2. november 2004 20:00
To:     address@hidden
Subject:        Re: Reply to header

Hendrik,

> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html

Well, I'm glad I finally got to read that.  I've always wondered why
people were so rabid about this issue.  Let's see what points this
fellow makes ...

The Principle of Minimal Munging:  Geez, how old is this article?  I can
hardly consider using a reply-to header "munging".

It Adds Nothing:  Completely ignores the entire point, which is that
yes, there is a way to reply to the author only, and yes, there is a way
to reply to both the author and the list (which is _completely_ useless,
since it double-replies), but there is no way to reply to only the list.

Double replies occur only, if the author is a subscriber.

So on lists, where anyone can post ( like LKML ) , Reply-To:
would be bad ( becuase the original author would not get a reply,
unless you add him manually ).

On lists, where only subscribers can post, Reply-To: might be good.

I personally am against Reply-To, but that is my personal opinion ;-)

Regards,
David