1996-05-05 - Re: A MODEST PROPOSAL (fwd)

Header Data

From: Bill Stewart <stewarts@ix.netcom.com>
To: “E. ALLEN SMITH” <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Message Hash: 762625d25f5aee43eab4e2ef432a830fdba8654b21c9c9d23d4e2478429ee0b7
Message ID: <199605050754.AAA02842@toad.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-05-05 10:38:32 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 5 May 1996 18:38:32 +0800

Raw message

From: Bill Stewart <stewarts@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 5 May 1996 18:38:32 +0800
To: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Subject: Re: A MODEST PROPOSAL (fwd)
Message-ID: <199605050754.AAA02842@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 08:05 PM 5/4/96 EDT, "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@mbcl.rutgers.edu> wrote:
>	The reason I say majordomo is broken is that it shows up
> with the address of the original sender, not the address of the list,
> as the From address. Other mailing list software does not do this.

I think that's user-settable, but there is no ideal approach.
Cypherpunks tried several different approaches to addresses, 
and settled on this one as causing the least overall problems.
The big advantage is that replies go to the original sender by default 
rather than to the list (which reduces the amount of personal mail going
to the list, winning both on noise-reduction and embarassment-reduction);
the disadvantage is that bouncemail goes to the original sender, rather
than the list or the list-manager (bouncemail to the sender is annoying, 
but minor; bouncemail to the list is extremely annoying, as well as 
potentially causing mail loops, which are an extreme lossage.  Bouncemail
to the list-manager is ideal (not that the list-manager usually reads it),
but it's hard to get without reducing replies directly to originators,
as well as increasing replies accidentally going to the list-manager.
#					Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, stewarts@ix.netcom.com, +1-415-442-2215
# goodtimes signature virus innoculation







Thread