Reply-To (was: piercing corporate)

paul.cour1 at paul.cour1 at
Sun Feb 8 07:07:21 EST 2004

Gosh! That was pretty clear to me ...



> From: bscott at
> Date: 2004/02/07 Sat PM 10:53:43 EST
> To: Greater NH Linux User Group <discuss at>
> Subject: Reply-To (was: piercing corporate)
> On Sat, 7 Feb 2004, at 6:00am, invalid at wrote:
> > I therefore advocate that you not set a reply-to header. 
>   Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but I set "Reply-To" on my outgoing
> messages to this list to "discuss at" precisely *because* I want
> replies to my messages to this list to go to this list.  I *want* all the
> discussion to be public.  I almost never want private replies (and on the
> rare occasions I do, I ask for them, and set Reply-To accordingly).  The
> power of collaboration is essential to Linux, GNHLUG, and, I dare say, most
> worthwhile human endeavors.
>   All too often, I find private replies on public lists did not need to be
> private, and the community loses something by making them private.  Case in
> point: The message you sent contained valuable information and nothing I
> could see as needing to be "private".  So why send it private?
>   So, as far as *I'm* concerned, my headers are correct.  I want replies to
> go to <gnhlug at>.  That's what Reply-To is for.  I don't ask you
> to change yours; please don't ask me to change mine.
> > Yes, yes, I realize I should check my headers before I hit the send key
> > ...
>   Yes, you should.
>   You should also change the "Subject" line when hijacking a thread.
>   There's also the whole "email address in a public email forum" flamewar
> that happened a few months ago.
>   I note that you, personally, Derek, seem to advocate netiquette and
> community involvement only when it involves no effort on your part.  If it
> means *you* need to do more work, then it's okay to ignore it.  That
> *REALLY* pisses me off.  Maybe it's just a bad coincidence, but I really
> can't help but notice a pattern here.
>   I say this mainly because I value your knowledge, insights, and opinions,
> on this list and elsewhere, and I would hate to lose them.  If you were just
> some net.random, I would just tell you to take a hike.
> -- 
> Ben Scott <bscott at>
> | The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do  |
> | not represent the views or policy of any other person or organization. |
> | All information is provided without warranty of any kind.              |
> _______________________________________________
> gnhlug-discuss mailing list
> gnhlug-discuss at

More information about the gnhlug-discuss mailing list