Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(October 2000)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: elist address or your address in message TO header
From: Tim Pierce <twp @ rootsweb . com>
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 18:33:44 -0400
To: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui @ plaidworks . com>
Cc: "David W. Tamkin" <dattier @ ripco . com>, list-managers @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to: <p0433010ab61e38a02024@[17.216.27.202]>
References: <200010261853.e9QIrki29507@ripco.com> <p0433010ab61e38a02024@[17.216.27.202]>

On Thu, Oct 26, 2000 at 12:41:08PM -0700, Chuq Von Rospach wrote:
> At 1:53 PM -0500 10/26/00, David W. Tamkin wrote:
> 
> >What about the compromise of a To: line like this:
> >
> >   To: sub@scri.ber (via the Foo Mailing List)
> 
> It allows filtering, but not replying, a key issue with discussion 
> lists.

Have any of the proponents of to-header munging considered how
replies to the list will be handled?  Are you going to move the
list's address to the Cc: header or something?

-- 
Regards,
Tim Pierce
RootsWeb.com lead system admonsterator
and Chief Hacking Officer



Follow-Ups:
References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: elist address or your address in message TO header
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com>
Next: Re: elist address or your address in message TO header
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: elist address or your address in message TO header
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com>
Next: Re: elist address or your address in message TO header
From: Chuq Von Rospach <chuqui@plaidworks.com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com