mail to individuals

[Odd]

Derek Broughton wrote:
> Odd wrote:
> 
>> Derek Broughton wrote:
>>> Michael Haney wrote:
>>>
>>>> The response from most of the support group to my problem is similar
>>>> to the response of some people in this group over the email issue,
>>>> they suggest replacing the monitor just like people here suggest
>>>> replacing the email client rather than facing up to the real issue at
>>>> hand.  They don't want to be bothered with being fair to every user
>>>> who happens to use their email client of choice because in their minds
>>>> the one they use is the best and everyone else who doesn't do it their
>>>> way is wrong.
>>> OK - but YOU want to break _my_ client's standard's compliant handling of
>>> list mail, by putting in a Reply-To header.  Doing something wrong
>>> because
>>> everybody else is doing something wrong, doesn't make it right.  So sure,
>>> go ahead and use a broken client if you want, but don't demand that the
>>> list be crippled because you insist on doing so.
>> How would the list be crippled by adding a Reply-To: header?
>> It would still include the List-Post: header.
> 
> Strictly speaking, I believe that, to be standards compliant, the List-Post 
> would be irrelevant.  When the Reply-To header is present, all clients 
> should default to replying to that address.  Reply-To is used specifically 
> to force responses to go to somewhere other than the originator.  Doing that 
> on a mailing list is an abuse.

No, being beaten by your father is abuse. This is merely an annoyance
for a few die-hards.

-- 
Odd