OFFTOPIC Re: [Mailman-Users] Archive URL in postings (2.1b3)
Kyle Rhorer
rhorer at swbell.net
Wed Oct 30 21:00:06 CET 2002
On Wednesday 30 October 2002 13:17, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> To: munging destroys information just as clearly as Reply-To:
> munging.
I have to disagree that Reply-To: munging destroys information. Here's
why -- most MUA's I have used do not by default show the Reply-To:
header for either incoming or outgoing mail. Some will let you
configure them to show it, some won't. Many (most?) users have never
seen a Reply-To: header (or field if you're speaking of entering info
into the MUA for sending), so they don't rely on it to give them any
meaningful information. If a list administrator wants to preserve the
From: header but cause replies to go back to the list, then IMO
Reply-To: munging is an appropriate way to cause such behavior. In
contrast, I'm leaning toward the opinion that changing the To: header
is Bad Juju®.
> Faking the To: header is no different. The mail isn't
> being sent to you personally, so it shouldn't claim that it is.
That point is what tipped my scale.
Kyle
--
Since the general civilizations of mankind, I believe there are more
instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual
and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden
usurpations.
-James Madison
More information about the Mailman-Users
mailing list