On Fri, Nov 29, 2002 at 09:21:50AM -0600, Nancy Thuleen wrote: > > 1. Have you accidentally sent a private reply instead of posting to > > the list? Yeah. If not hee, then elsewhere. > > 2. Have you received an accidental private reply that was meant to go > > to the list? Yeah. > > 4. Has the Reply-To behavior of this list caused you confusion when > > posting to other mailing lists, perhaps even causing you to No, this list just confuses me for itself. > (discussion-based lists), and with only one exception, they all have the > reply-to set to the individual poster, just like this list -- correctly, in > other words. :) Do I just belong to unusual lists, or is this really not > the norm? One list I've been on since 1993 has had it that way forever, In my own experience, such behavior is exceptional. Most lists I'm familiar with set Reply-To to the list. Of the two others which don't, one is a simple sendmail group alias -- there's no software to munge headers with, or subscribe with (owner does it all manually) and one (the Cherryh list) only comes out as a digest from the list owner. > and all of the others have had that set since their inception. Only one > list -- and the one I'd characterize as less technologically-savvy, that I joined the extropians list in 1993; it had already been around for a few years. It's very tech-savvy, and has always set Reply-To to the list. That's hardly a new thing; majordomo is old. Or VMS LISTSERV. AFAIK cypherpunks also sets Reply-To, and you don't get more savvy than that... Before using mutt, I did find it annoying to reply privately to individuals. But these were discussion lists; I rarely wanted to do such a thing. -xx- Damien X-)