A listadmin's plea.....

[Kysh]

On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 03:27:28PM -0700, Michael S. Fischer wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 01:54:34PM -0700, Kysh wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 01:40:58PM -0700, Mike Markley wrote:
> > > Bah... a list that doesn't mangle headers in evil ways is misconfigured? :P
> > 
> > It's not evil! It follows the original intent of the RFCs! Christ almighty, 
> > I've never understood you people. The email is sent to an address. That
> > address turns around and re-sends it. Why on earth should the from not be
> > set to the address that re-sent it? Why should the reply-to field be added?
> > It's a complete mangling of protocol, and it's really annoying to boot. 
> 
> Read this, and see if it convinces you:
> 
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html

Wow, I really needed to read this email twice. That's what makes no-reply-to
lists so wonderful- If you accidentally delete a reply in a thread, you have
at least 10 other copies to read. It's shotgun redundancy. 

-Kysh
-- 
.+------------------------------------------------------------+.
|  'Life begins at 120kias' - http://www.lapdragon.org/flying  |
|  CBR-F4 streetbike -        http://www.lapdragon.org/cbr     |
|  1968 Mustang fastback -    http://www.lapdragon.org/mustang | 
|  Got 'nix? -                http://www.unix-vs-nt.org/       |
|  KG6FOB -		      http://www.lapdragon.org/ham     | 
`+------------------------------------------------------------+'
   "If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts."
                                      -- Albert Einstein