At 09:25 AM 3/4/99 -0600, Ingrid Shafer wrote:

[snip]

>>Reply-To: "\"ARCC (Association for the Rights of Catholics in the Church)\"
>>              <"<@_._:[log in to unmask]>
>>Sender: "\"ARCC (Association for the Rights of Catholics in the Church)\"
>>              <"<@_._:[log in to unmask]>
>>From: "\"Prof. Ingrid Shafer\" <"<@_._:[log in to unmask]>
>>Subject:      technical advice
>>To: <@_._:[log in to unmask]>
>
>When now I push 'Reply', I get these to my mind redundant, and, when you
>think of millions of e-mails, vastly wasteful extra "@_._:" and "\" signs.
>I assure you, I am still plain "[log in to unmask]".

The procmail-dev list comes out of cuci.nl, and lo and behold these
@_._ things started showing up on that list too.

To quote from a post on that list:
>It looks like a problem at cuci.nl: when I bounce a message off there
>via [log in to unmask] the header (but not envelope) addresses are
>munged:
>       To: <@_._:[log in to unmask]>
>       Subject: kjsdhfjksd
>       Date: Thu, 04 Mar 1999 11:01:17 -0600
>       From: "xxxxx xxxxxx <"<@_._:[log in to unmask]>

(The x's are mine since I don't have his permission to post his name/address
on this list).

So, whatever it is does seem to be a cuci.nl problem.

Cheers,
Stan