From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by 10.204.66.147 with SMTP id n19cs28335bki; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 06:23:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.88.15 with SMTP id y15mr7297595qcl.39.1282224186176; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 06:23:06 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from rubyforge.org (rubyforge.org [205.234.109.19]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j2si2885116qck.178.2010.08.19.06.23.05; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 06:23:06 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of sup-talk-bounces@rubyforge.org designates 205.234.109.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=205.234.109.19; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of sup-talk-bounces@rubyforge.org designates 205.234.109.19 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=sup-talk-bounces@rubyforge.org Received: from rubyforge.org (rubyforge.org [127.0.0.1]) by rubyforge.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B8EB19783D1; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 09:23:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from kuovi.tilus.net (kuovi.tilus.net [80.68.89.168]) by rubyforge.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67AF1185839C for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 08:49:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kuovi.tilus.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 092F91EF14; Thu, 19 Aug 2010 15:49:21 +0300 (EEST) From: Tero Tilus To: sup-talk In-reply-to: <1282218941-sup-4503@duck> References: <1282214690-sup-777@eris> <1282218941-sup-4503@duck> Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 15:49:21 +0300 Message-Id: <1282221210-sup-5773@tilus.net> User-Agent: Sup/git Subject: Re: [sup-talk] mailinglists in CC X-BeenThere: sup-talk@rubyforge.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: User & developer discussion of Sup List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: sup-talk-bounces@rubyforge.org Errors-To: sup-talk-bounces@rubyforge.org Israel Herraiz, 2010-08-19 14:58: > It's really annoying to send a message to the list instead of to a > single person by accident. > > In any case, mailing lists can set a Reply-To header Whoa! Mailing lists _can_ do that, but they should not. Ironically you happend to mention one of the reasons why they should not. :D Let's consider the max damage done by modifying vs. not modifying reply-to: If the header is unmangled the user may in certain sircumstances accidentally send private mail instead of list mail. That's an annoyance at most. If the header is mangled by list server the user may in certain sircumstances accidentally send list mail instead of private mail. That may cost the user a lot of goodwill, money or her job. Ergo, list setting reply-to header violates the principle of least damage. -- Tero Tilus ## 050 3635 235 ## http://tero.tilus.net/ _______________________________________________ sup-talk mailing list sup-talk@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/sup-talk