On Sun, 1 Jun 1997 15:53:51 -0500 (CDT), Leslie Mikesell wrote:
>And to reverse your argument, if majordomo (as an agent of the list
>manager) isn't the reason I have this message, what is it? You
>wouldn't have sent something to me were it not for the list so why
>shouldn't my reply be guided back the same way? However, this is
>silly semantics - the real issue is where a 'normal' reply should
>go and I believe this depends on the nature of the list and the
>intent of it's manager.
No, it is not that simple. The REPLY-TO header is there to
let the composer decide where replies to message should go.
She may want replies to go to a different address than the one
in the FROM header. If the list manager manipulates the message
by replacing the REPLY-TO, or adding another REPLY-TO, you have
removed the possibility of replying to the sender at the address
she wishes you to reply to.
IMHO, there are two solutions:
1. do nothing with REPLY-TO, or
2. enclose the message in a new message in such a way that
the FROM, REPLY-TO, DATE and SUBJECT headers of the original
message also are enclose, but the new message has the list as
FROM header.
Mats Dufberg
mats.dufberg@abc.se
Follow-Ups:
|
|
