Thanks. I thought of this, but in practice there's no way 90% of the people who want to reply to sender only are going to establish a login account in order to get the email address. What I expect is that they'll continue to reply to the whole list asking the poster to send the email address to them (and that a substantial proportion will reply to the whole list, too . . . and then someone -- or more-- will explain that they should reply just to the sender).



Probably, as the tramps in _Godot_ have it, "nothing to be done."



-- Russ



-----Original Message-----

From: LISTSERV List Owners' Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Charles Clausen

Sent: October-04-17 4:47 PM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: hidden sender addresses



I don't know what all can be done to deal with this, but I believe that full email addresses are always presented in the archives webpages for a list, provided the subscriber is logged in. So if you can keep people reminded that they can refer to the list archives...



On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 15:31:46 +0000, Russell Hunt <[log in to unmask]> wrote:



>Recently on the list I own I've been encountering requests for people to contact senders off list so that they can get their email addresses and take conversations off list. I believe this has become necessary because some email clients (e.g, most egregiously, Outlook) hide the sender's email address, displaying only the name under an "on behalf of."



############################



To unsubscribe from the LSTOWN-L list:

write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]

or click the following link:

http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-PEACH.exe?SUBED1=LSTOWN-L&A=1



############################



To unsubscribe from the LSTOWN-L list:

write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]

or click the following link:

http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-PEACH.exe?SUBED1=LSTOWN-L&A=1