Am 23. Dec, 2001 schwätzte Tom Achtenberg so:

> On Sunday 23 December 2001 08:07 am, you wrote:
> > Rats!
> >
> > Apologies to the group for sending to the whole group
> > what was intended to be private replies to individuals
> > who responded to my question about LPI certification.
> >
> > Apparently our list server incorporates the
> > intrinsically evil Reply-To header. Normally I *always*
> > check my headers by eye on sending mail, particularly
> > replies, but once in a blue moon I get burned.
> > Fortunately there was nothing in my two messages that
> > was embarrassing to me or anyone else. It just wasn't
> > intended for everyone, and the content of the two
> > messages was essentially repeated.
> >
> > Thou shalt not use Reply-To without good reason!
> > (Sometimes there is.)
> 

> Thou shalt not send replies to a list message without checking the header if 
> thou dost not want it to go to the whole list.  As a default a list message 
> SHOULD be set to reply to the list.  That is a good default.

Depends on whether it's supposed to be a discussion or informational list.
PLUG-discuss for whatever obscure reason is a 'discussion list' :),
therefore reply-to for the list. PLUG-announce, however, is supposed to be
informational ( supposed to because we use it so infrequently ), therefore
replies should go to the poster.

Some people believe no list should have the list auto-magically included in
replies. I think that stifles discussion. A good client ( mine doesn't have
this feature :( ) will allow reply and reply-to-list. That makes things a
bit clearer. For those using mutt do we have PLUG-discuss setup properly to
appear as a list?

ciao,

der.hans
-- 
#  http://home.pages.de/~lufthans/   http://www.DevelopOnline.com/
#  Knowledge is useless unless it's shared. - der.hans