You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@spamassassin.apache.org by Adam Moffett <ad...@plexicomm.net> on 2011/01/28 23:00:02 UTC
List Policy Question: Why no reply-to: header?
I looked at a few messages and didn't see any reply-to: header.
When I click reply on someone's message here it I am replying to them
only since they're obviously the sender.
Is there any particular reason there can't be a reply-to: header added
by the listserv?
Re: List Policy Question: Why no reply-to: header?
Posted by Matt Kettler <mk...@verizon.net>.
On 1/31/2011 2:51 AM, Matt Kettler wrote:
> On 1/28/2011 5:28 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 17:00:02 -0500, Adam Moffett <ad...@plexicomm.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Is there any particular reason there can't be a reply-to: header added
>>> by the listserv?
>> no its a mua problem to use list-post header when replying
>>
> In this case, the Benny is using Thunderbird 3.1.7, which even has a
> "reply list" button that uses the List-Post header....
Correction:
In this case Benny, the OP (Adam) is using Thunderbird 3.1.7, which
even has a
"reply list" button that uses the List-Post header....
Sorry for the mis-placement of names..
Re: List Policy Question: Why no reply-to: header?
Posted by Benny Pedersen <me...@junc.org>.
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:28:27 -0500, Adam Moffett <ad...@plexicomm.net>
wrote:
> People can believe I'm dumb for thinking that adding/modifying the
> reply-to: header is a simpler and cleaner solution, and I can believe
> people are dumb for thinking there should be multiple reply buttons in
> MUA's. I suppose we'll just have to each agree that the other party is
> dumb.
no Reply-To: should be ignored if List-Post: header exists, make a local
procmailrc that changes it for you or use a mua that solves it eq install
roundcube 0.5 stable, and commit patches if it works badly compared to
thunderbird :)
Re: List Policy Question: Why no reply-to: header?
Posted by Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uh...@fantomas.sk>.
On 31.01.11 09:28, Adam Moffett wrote:
> Yes I have a "reply list" button, but this is the only list I'm on where
> I have to use it. I have gotten into the habit of just hitting "reply".
> So I sometimes accidentally reply to the poster instead of the list.
>
> It's annoying to me, but it sounds like it's an issue like abortion
> where everyone's made up their mind already and there isn't much point
> arguing about it.
>
> People can believe I'm dumb for thinking that adding/modifying the
> reply-to: header is a simpler and cleaner solution,
Well, is it not. Setting Reply-To: is the senders' business and list should
not set/override it.
> and I can believe people are dumb for thinking there should be multiple
> reply buttons in MUA's. I suppose we'll just have to each agree that the
> other party is dumb.
There could be one button with different defaults depending on the mail
headers. But it's always up to the replier to decide whether send the
message privately to the poster, to the list, or sometimes to both.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
I feel like I'm diagonally parked in a parallel universe.
Re: List Policy Question: Why no reply-to: header?
Posted by Martin Gregorie <ma...@gregorie.org>.
On Mon, 2011-01-31 at 15:22 +0000, Anthony Cartmell wrote:
> > Yes I have a "reply list" button, but this is the only list I'm on where
> > I have to use it. I have gotten into the habit of just hitting
> > "reply". So I sometimes accidentally reply to the poster instead of the
> > list.
>
> FWIW, Opera's excellent mail client sets "Reply to list" as the default
> action for this list - "reply to sender" is available via the drop-down
> options :)
>
Same here - Evolution 2.32.1. If the mail is from a list, hitting
'Reply' pops up a dialogue with options for replying privately, to all,
or to the list.
> No need to think, for me!
>
Same here.
Martin
Re: List Policy Question: Why no reply-to: header?
Posted by Anthony Cartmell <li...@fonant.com>.
> Yes I have a "reply list" button, but this is the only list I'm on where
> I have to use it. I have gotten into the habit of just hitting
> "reply". So I sometimes accidentally reply to the poster instead of the
> list.
FWIW, Opera's excellent mail client sets "Reply to list" as the default
action for this list - "reply to sender" is available via the drop-down
options :)
No need to think, for me!
Anthony
--
www.fonant.com - Quality web sites
Re: List Policy Question: Why no reply-to: header?
Posted by Adam Moffett <ad...@plexicomm.net>.
>> no thunderbird need a plugin to do this
> However, the original poster (adfam moffett) uses thunderbird 3.1.7 too, so
> he can have the list-reply function
Yes I have a "reply list" button, but this is the only list I'm on where
I have to use it. I have gotten into the habit of just hitting
"reply". So I sometimes accidentally reply to the poster instead of the
list.
It's annoying to me, but it sounds like it's an issue like abortion
where everyone's made up their mind already and there isn't much point
arguing about it.
People can believe I'm dumb for thinking that adding/modifying the
reply-to: header is a simpler and cleaner solution, and I can believe
people are dumb for thinking there should be multiple reply buttons in
MUA's. I suppose we'll just have to each agree that the other party is
dumb.
Re: List Policy Question: Why no reply-to: header?
Posted by Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uh...@fantomas.sk>.
> >> On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 17:00:02 -0500, Adam Moffett
> >> <ad...@plexicomm.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Is there any particular reason there can't be a reply-to: header added
> >>> by the listserv?
> > On 1/28/2011 5:28 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> >> no its a mua problem to use list-post header when replying
> On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 02:51:56 -0500, Matt Kettler <mk...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
> > In this case, the Benny is using Thunderbird 3.1.7, which even has a
> > "reply list" button that uses the List-Post header....
On 31.01.11 09:15, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> no thunderbird need a plugin to do this
However, the original poster (adfam moffett) uses thunderbird 3.1.7 too, so
he can have the list-reply function.
--
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
Due to unexpected conditions Windows 2000 will be released
in first quarter of year 1901
Re: List Policy Question: Why no reply-to: header?
Posted by Benny Pedersen <me...@junc.org>.
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 02:51:56 -0500, Matt Kettler <mk...@verizon.net>
wrote:
> On 1/28/2011 5:28 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 17:00:02 -0500, Adam Moffett
>> <ad...@plexicomm.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Is there any particular reason there can't be a reply-to: header added
>>> by the listserv?
>> no its a mua problem to use list-post header when replying
>>
> In this case, the Benny is using Thunderbird 3.1.7, which even has a
> "reply list" button that uses the List-Post header....
no thunderbird need a plugin to do this
Re: List Policy Question: Why no reply-to: header?
Posted by Matt Kettler <mk...@verizon.net>.
On 1/28/2011 5:28 PM, Benny Pedersen wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 17:00:02 -0500, Adam Moffett <ad...@plexicomm.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Is there any particular reason there can't be a reply-to: header added
>> by the listserv?
> no its a mua problem to use list-post header when replying
>
In this case, the Benny is using Thunderbird 3.1.7, which even has a
"reply list" button that uses the List-Post header....
Re: List Policy Question: Why no reply-to: header?
Posted by Benny Pedersen <me...@junc.org>.
On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 17:00:02 -0500, Adam Moffett <ad...@plexicomm.net>
wrote:
> Is there any particular reason there can't be a reply-to: header added
> by the listserv?
no its a mua problem to use list-post header when replying
Re: List Policy Question: Why no reply-to: header?
Posted by Kris Deugau <kd...@vianet.ca>.
Adam Moffett wrote:
> I looked at a few messages and didn't see any reply-to: header.
>
> When I click reply on someone's message here it I am replying to them
> only since they're obviously the sender.
>
> Is there any particular reason there can't be a reply-to: header added
> by the listserv?
(Here we go again... I've yet to meet a mailing list where one side or
the other doesn't get asked about at least once every six months or so.)
To answer your question, the Apache listmasters have chosen their
particular answer to this question on this side:
http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/reply-to-harmful.html
(Not sure where the canonical link, if such exists, really lives; that
seems to be a mirror of http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html.)
Links to a rebuttal, and rebuttal of the rebuttal mirrored on the same
site are at http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/listreplyto.html.
I've gotten into the habit of "reply-all, set list as To and Reply-to,
delete extra recipients" for lists with this policy.
-kgd, who gave up caring after the first and only time *I* asked about
this issue, on another list, back in the Middle Ages (ie ~1998, IIRC)