>I am now wondering if some mail programs have trouble with that and I am
>contemplating putting back Reply-To=List,Ignore.
 
I wouldn't have mine any other way. As a matter of fact, it was a pain having to
respond on this list, because after hitting reply, I looked and *behold* the
address wasn't right. So I had to change windows and all that crap, then cut and
paste the address in. Very seldom do I ever remember to look at the return
address. Generally, I respond to a message, and it doesn't come back across, so
I go look at what I sent. Sure enough, it had the wrong address. When I first
got on the net, I put my return address everywhere I thought it was necessary. I
saw a place that said "reply-to" so I put it in there as well. When mail kept
coming to me rather than whatever list, I asked around and figured it out. Could
it be other people don't think to look at the return address, either? Actually a
good many don't. Each time I see it happen, I always post a message to whatever
list and explain why people should blank out their reply-to fields. From my
experience, very few people reply by personal email. If a person *is* going to
reply by personal email, a person is more likely to look and change the address
under that circumstance, rather than having to change the address each time a
response goes back to a list. Besides, if people want a personal response, they
usually say so. I have never had anyone complain about having the variable set
to "ignore". I have seen a lot of confusion about it being set some other way.
Supposedly, the esoteric theory is people should decide for themselves, pursuant
to their own email options. I don't agree with that. If necessary, they can just
announce their intent at the top of their message. They would need to do that
anyway.
 
 
--
http://cust.iamerica.net/mcdivitt/