``Every time you do a "Group-reply" some poor shmoes are receiving
This is one user's description of what happens when you follow up to
From: Member <member(_at_)whatever(_dot_)org>
To: List <mailing-list(_at_)some(_dot_)net>
It's used as a justification---in fact, the only justification---for
reply-to munging, i.e., adding Reply-To: mailing-list(_at_)some(_dot_)net(_dot_)
As http://www.unicom.com/FAQ/reply-to-harmful.html explains in detail,
reply-to munging is harmful. But the user's criticism is still valid.
Followups produce duplicates.
You might suggest leaving From out of the followup address list. But
that's even worse: if the sender isn't in the To line he won't get a
copy of the followup.
This problem is well known. The solution---having a header field that
says where to send followups---has been proposed many times. But MUAs
don't seem to support any such field. Why not?
Perhaps it would help to have a good name. ``Followup-To'' is taken by
news, unfortunately. ``Wide-Reply-To'' and ``Group-Reply-To'' are
incomprehensible to novice users. ``Followups'' might work, but it's
probably too close to ``Followup-To''.
Any ideas? How many MUA implementors do we have here, anyway?
Let your users manage their own mailing lists. http://pobox.com/~djb/qmail.html