Idea how to leave double-mails out?

Todd Todd <>
Wed Jun 5 21:24:01 2002

Hash: SHA1

Nick Andriash wrote:
> The problem is the List Software, or whatever is responsible for setting
> the headers, in that it does not include a Reply-To header.

The list software is Mailman.  It is not really a problem with that software
that it doesn't add (or change) the Reply-To: header.  It is a deliberate
setting that is up to the list admin.  There is some discussion in the
Mailman admin area regarding the Reply-To: header.  Here is that discussion
for those without access to a Mailman list admin area:

    There are many reasons not to introduce or override the Reply-To: header.
    One is that some posters depend on their own Reply-To: settings to convey
    their valid return address. Another is that modifying Reply-To: makes it
    much more difficult to send private replies. See `Reply-To' Munging
    Considered Harmful[1] for a general discussion of this issue. See Reply-To
    Munging Considered Useful[2] for a dissenting opinion. 


Mailman's default is to leave the Reply-To: header unchanged.  The list
admin is free to change it to be the list's address, which is what many list
admins do.  This makes folks that want this behavior happy.  It also annoys
those users who prefer the current behavior.  On lists that I run, I use the
list address as the Reply-To: as I am not swayed by the arguments against
doing so.

- -- 

Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum --
"I think that I think, therefore I think that I am."
                -- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"

 PGP Key: D654075A / 0A55 D9D6 055E E2B9 99E9 7817 BAFF B4F4 D654 075A 
 Key URL:

Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: When crypto is outlawed bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.