Date   : Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:26:19 +0000
From   : pete@... (Pete Turnbull)
Subject: Who the message is from...

On 08/11/2009 15:03, Kevin Bracey wrote:
> Michael Firth wrote:

>> The problem is that most people will be using pretty dumb clients. Due 
>> to Microsoft's dominance of the computing world, a lot of people (me 
>> included) will usually be using Microsoft applications for e-mail. A 
>> large percentage of the rest will be using Thunderbird, which is also 
>> not a "list-aware" mail client (as far as I know).

> You're right there - basically e-mail clients have gotten worse/simpler 
> over time. So maybe "Reply-to" munging has become more the norm because 
> of that. I'm intrigued by the person who said they were on 20 lists and 
> this is the only one not munging reply-to. 

Not really.  Early clients (1980s and 1990s) were even simpler.  I'm on 
many lists at home and work, and this one is very low traffic, so the 
fact that it's a rare exception which doesn't mung Reply-To is 
irritating, sometimes frustrating, and obviously wrong :-) but hardly 
the end of the world.

I tend to make a distinction between what I would call "discussion" 
lists like this one, where the expectation is for replies to be sent (by 
whatever method) to all the members, and "announcement" lists where 
replies, if ever made at all, would be a comment or correction typically 
sent to the author alone.  Both types have been around virtually as long 
as email itself, and it's certainly more common for the former to set a 
Reply-To and the latter not to.

-- 
Pete                                           Peter Turnbull
                                               Network Manager
                                               University of York