From owner-freebsd-current Thu Nov 4 17: 7:56 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from rah.star-gate.com (216-200-29-190.snj0.flashcom.net [216.200.29.194]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4AD91511A for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 17:07:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hasty@rah.star-gate.com) Received: from rah.star-gate.com (localhost.star-gate.com [127.0.0.1]) by rah.star-gate.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA49835; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 17:05:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hasty@rah.star-gate.com) Message-Id: <199911050105.RAA49835@rah.star-gate.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Alexander Langer Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: reply to field In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 05 Nov 1999 01:57:36 +0100." <19991105015736.A21301@cichlids.cichlids.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 17:05:53 -0800 From: Amancio Hasty Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > Thus spake Amancio Hasty (hasty@rah.star-gate.com): > > > it easier to reply to postings to the mailing lists so people don't > > get multiple copies of the same message. I don't have such > > problem because I have a mail filter which delete duplicate > > messages. > > Reply-To: also destroys private Reply-To:'s. > > You can use a MUA, that supports "group reply", as Mutt does. > I just thought it was a good idea . Recently I subscribed to another group mailing lists and the folks over there don't seem to mind if the reply field is set . The net effect is less traffic on the net and those who hate the extra traffic over their links love it. Cheers -- Amancio Hasty hasty@rah.star-gate.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message