FAQ: Why Reply-to Me? (was Re: [SLE] Which Linux?)

Randall R Schulz wrote:

Ken,

On Monday 03 April 2006 10:40, ken wrote:

...

...

...

...

No, my mailer isn't hallucinating. Because I wanted replies to my post to go to the list, I put the list address in the Reply-to field. (Makes sense, yes?) The list server must have removed it. You claimed that Patrick's mail had a Reply-To, which it does not. I obviously haven't checked them all, but I'm pretty sure none of Patrick's list postings have a Reply-To header.

Randall Schulz Thanks, Randall. I was wondering why I started the thread "Why no Reply-to?" Does this (my) email have a Reply-to field in it?

Yes:

Reply-To: Suse Linux English

Randall Schulz

Thanks much for the reply and confirmation. So it would seem that if I post something to this list and want replies to it to go to the list, all I have to do is include a header which says: Reply-to: Suse Linux English If I don't include this header in my post, then I should fully expect that people will reply to me instead of to the list... and I would really have no grounds for complaining about this to them, no call for asking them, "Why did you reply to me? Please reply to the LIST." This use of Reply-to shouldn't require changing to a different email client or even the reconfiguring of one's current client. Nor does it mandate a change in the way the list server is configured. It simply allows the sender to specify where replies to his or her post should be directed. Yes? -- "This world ain't big enough for the both of us," said the big noema to the little noema.