Re: Reply-to mangling

Alex Holden writes ("[gnupic] Reply-to mangling"):
> I'm starting to think maybe I should turn reply-to mangling on after  
> all. [...]

No, please don't.

> The lists that mangle the reply-to header seem to be very much  
> in the majority now, so it does tend to confuse people the first time  
> they encounter one that doesn't (I've had a few people complain  
> privately to me that "the list seems to be broken" because of this  
> over the years). Also the much talked about "reply to list" mail  
> client feature (which would have allowed you to choose between  
> replying publicly or privately with a single mouse click) hasn't been  
> implemented in the vast majority of mail clients, so working around  
> it by messing with reply-to in the list server is the next best  
> thing. [...]

Setting `Reply-To' is very annoying because it makes it very hard to
reply privately.  Replying publicly is still easy - you just do
`reply to all' which pretty much every mail client has.

Another list that I'm on had `reply-to' set until too many people
posted confidential stuff to the list by mistake.  They would keep
asking for their messages to be removed from the archives, too, making
work for the listadmins.

Ian.