|
From: | Allan Clark |
Subject: | [OT] reply-to (was: AC_FOREACH public?) |
Date: | Sat, 22 Oct 2005 19:42:01 -0700 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.8b4) Gecko/20050918 SeaMonkey/1.0a |
Keith Marshall wrote:
great. I've got two eyes. These duplicates are statistical noise in the world of spam... and my inbox represents mail for me, my other boxes represent mail from the list. I don't see the problem. ...and I still have choice to "reply" or "reply-all".On Saturday 22 October 2005 10:08 am, Allan Clark wrote:You might want to consider switching to elm, mutt, or a Mozilla-based client (if you're a graphical guy); they have these features, and are fairly well-tested.I don't have any option to do this -- I am obliged by Company policy to use Lotus Notes, which, while it does have a "Reply-to-All" option, it's badly crippled, and fills the cc list with all sorts of rubbish.But "Reply-to-All" is *not* the most appropriate solution -- it's what I used here, so *you* can have *two* copies of this message.
KMail works well for me at home, and offers all the flexibility I could ever ask for, whether the "Reply-to" header points to the list or the originator -- see my more detailed message on the subject. Unfortunately, using Lotus Notes at work, you guts are going to see me replying to you privately, when I meant to reply to the list -- please feel free to forward such replies for me.
(or not) Allan
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |