UOL Anti spam is back, again...

[Les Mikesell]

On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 17:02, Tim wrote:

> Les Mikesell:
> > Well, no, it's because from the beginning internet mail lists
> > used the sender's 'From:' and the replier was expected to
> > 'reply all' if he wanted to include the list.  Some have
> > since changed the list behavior but there is still a good
> > argument that the original way was correct.  (The argument
> > goes that you should expect email to be private and having
> > a private message exposed in pubic is a worse problem than
> > the reverse.)
> 
> For private mail, to begin with, I might agree.  But when sending mail
> to a PUBLIC mailing LIST, I don't think there's any pretence about it
> supposedly being private mail.

"Sending to" isn't the issue - it is "replying to" that is the
problem.  When you reply you should have your choice of replying
to the individual or to the list.  Here is the canonical
argument that the list should not modify the Reply-to: as
set by the original sender:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html

I don't necessarily agree, but I'm too lazy to track which
lists do and don't and just hit 'Reply to all' for all lists,
which may or may not have a side effect of sending an extra
copy to the previous sender, and in the cases where it does
it may or may not be wanted.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com