From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/2484 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Johannes_H=FCsing?= Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: replies Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 00:29:35 +0200 Sender: owner-ntg-context@let.uu.nl Message-ID: <20000813002935.15027@spi.power.uni-essen.de> References: <14741.8774.386846.462340@bitmuis.thuis.nl> <39952723.740F14A4@pobox.com> <39958723.6F016F12@gmx.net> Reply-To: johannes.huesing@uni-essen.de NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035393275 9250 80.91.224.250 (23 Oct 2002 17:14:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 17:14:35 +0000 (UTC) Original-To: ConTeXt In-Reply-To: <39958723.6F016F12@gmx.net>; from Hraban on Sat, Aug 12, 2000 at 07:19:31PM +0200 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:2484 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.comp.tex.context:2484 On Sat 2000-08-12 (19:19), Hraban wrote: > Berend de Boer wrote: > > Yes, I also hate it that reply replies to the sender instead of the > > list. That doesn't facilitate list communication. > > I get other mailing lists where the list server overwrites > the "reply-to" with the list address -- isn't this possible > for the ntg server? It is technically possible but violates an RFC which I don't find right now that states that a reply-to is not to be overwritten. The basic reason that reply-to-sender is set as default instead of reply-to-list is that it is much less embarrassing to send a message accidentally to a list which was intended to be sent to one user, instead of the other way round. Greetings Johannes