Lists Home |
Date Index |
Robin Berjon <email@example.com> writes:
> Rick Marshall wrote:
> > couldn't we have the reply-to: on this list set to xml-dev
> etc so that
> > a simple reply click will send messages back. sometimes i don't hit
> > reply to all, and sometimes i forget to delete all the cc users.
> That's a permathread all over the net. Some people prefer it one way,
> others another, and both sides will come up with smart but useless
> arguments to show that the other side's approach is evil.
In theory there could be one real advantage to always forging the
reply-to (though AFAIK no mailing lists actually works this way): you
don't need to expose the real mail addresses of the senders. If you
really wanted direct replies to the senders along with the regular
autogenerated mail the mailing list could build the replies using
invisibly managed headers, possibly as an option via an extra cc record.
Reply-to would reply to the list only, reply-to-all would cause some
extra management at the mailing list to generate replies directly to the
original sender(s). You could give digest readers, (or all readers for
that matter) the option of always getting direct replies when they sign
up. This would remove the ability to harvest mail addresses from mailing
lists (though it wouldn't stop anyone from adding an e-mail address in
plain text in the message)....