[svlug] Fw: MICROSOFT ACQUIRES LINUX OPERATING SYSTEM

[J C Lawrence]

On 9 Nov 1998 19:14:45 GMT 
Marc MERLIN<marc_merlin at magic.metawire.com> wrote:

> On 9 Nov 1998 02:45:33 -0800, Javilk <javilk at polly.mall-net.com>
> wrote:

>> Let us just say that most of the real world lists are set up that
>> any e-mail to the list re-writes the headers so replies go to the
>> list, not the individuals.

> BTW, for the benefit of those who don't know, this is a plain lie.
> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html

Scanning across the lists at Onelist, Egroups (was Findmail), and
other such I'd guesstimate that over 80% of them munge Reply-To (I'd
feel pretty safe with over 90%, but I'll be conservative for now).
Scanning the 38 lists I'm subscribed to here at work, all but a
single-digit few technical in nature, all of 6 of them (once of
which is SVLUG) don't munge Reply-To.

That certainly seems to resemble the "most" that Javilk contends.  

Much (if you don't like the "most" description) of the list world
munges Reply-To and considers that both normal and customary and
find the fact that some not only don't munge Reply-To, but refuse
to, flummoxing.  <shrug> Technical correctness and market popularity
yet again separate.

> No reply expected

Now this of course is not to argue the correctness or even the value
of munging (or not) Reply-To.  Just the _usage_.  My own views on
the area agree neither with Javilk or the referenced URL.

-- 
J C Lawrence                               Internet: claw at kanga.nu
(Contractor)                              Internet: coder at kanga.nu
---------(*)                     Internet: claw at under.engr.sgi.com
...Honourary Member of Clan McFud -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...

--
echo "unsubscribe svlug" | mail majordomo at svlug.org
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ to unsubscribe