> I think there's some sort of preference setting in Entourage that may > trigger that sort of problem. The same list has other Entourage users > and they don't have this problem as far as I know. I don't have the Entourage experience, but I'm hoping this data will help if anyone on this list does know the product. > Here's the header of a recent message ... : > Reply-To: [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask] This looks well-formed to me. I don't see why it should mess up the replies. However, I do notice that the sample you sent originally shows the replies going to: "Macintosh Users Group of Southern NJ , Stan Horwitz" <[log in to unmask]@TEMPLE.EDU> when there is a problem. The interesting thing here is that the Reply-To: header entry does not supply the names associated with the addresses; it has only the addresses themselves. That means there are two possible causes: either Entourage has a configuration option somewhere that causes it to mess up if set a particular way, or Entourage processes the addresses differently (and messes up) when it finds matching address-book entries and tries to add the names. I have delayed sending this while trying to come up with an example of a two-address Reply-To: field, just to see if my own email client (Microsoft Outlook Express) can understand it. So far, I have been unable to get OE to send a well-formed two-address field in the first place. Hal Keen