[SWLUG] Reply-To on lists
dave at cridland.net
Fri May 19 12:25:03 UTC 2006
On Fri May 19 13:18:43 2006, Chris M. Jackson wrote:
> On 5/19/06, Julian Hall <lists at kaotic.co.uk> wrote:
>> example, I click Reply All to this message, then Justin and Dave
>> two copies each as well as the list. I've noticed quite a lot in
>> mails replying to this list that more than one copy goes out. It's
> ... and if they're using sensible mail clients, it identifies
> (correctly) from the Message-Id: header that they are duplicates,
> (hopefully) discards one copy.
Ah, but this is a problem in as much as the client then loses the
list-* metadata headers, since typically they discard newer copies,
keeping the personal copy that's usually faster to arrive.
To be honest, replying to both sender and list is a little archaic
these days. In general, it's either the sender or the list.
>> IMHO those who complain about alleged munging should think about
>> bandwidth being wasted by multiple copies of the same email flying
> Yes, I imagine a few extra copies of tiny email messages will bring
> the Internet *screeching* to a halt ...
There's a single-pipe bandwidth hit for duplicate recipients, and the
sender's submission server (or its smarthost, usually the ISP's
The thing is that implementing reply-to-list is pretty trivial - if I
can do it, it must be - but it's much harder to deal with the
reply-to set to list issue. Which basically means that if your client
doesn't have such a feature, file a bug or download an extension. I
*think* it took me less than an afternoon to implement.
You see things; and you say "Why?"
But I dream things that never were; and I say "Why not?"
- George Bernard Shaw
More information about the Swlug