Re: Replies to the list

[David Rogers]

* Michael Welsh Duggan <address@hidden> [2010-08-30 18:04]:

> Tim McNamara <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Is there a reason that the reply-to header is not set for the mailing
> > list?  This is the only mailing list I have ever participated in
> > which does not have this header set and it results in replies being
> > sent to individuals instead of the list quite regularly.  In a list
> > like this where is explicitly asked that discussions take place in
> > the list and not back-channel, it seems like it would make sense to
> > have the header set so that replies are sent to the list by default.
>
> Yes, there is a reason.
>
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
> http://marc.merlins.org/netrants/listreplyto.txt


The logic at those links is impeccable but irrelevant. The "harm" in
"reply-to considered harmful" affects only the elegance of the config
files of a few of the l33t. The harm in multiple misdirected replies is
greater, and a reply not to the list is by definition misdirected. I
know that changing the reply header is not the way mail was supposed to
work, but it simply doesn't matter anymore (assuming it ever did).

--
David