Thank you, thank you for applying more light and less heat to this
discussion. And particularly for an actual proposal that looks like
Excerpts from transarc.system.ietf-822: 9-Jul-97 Re: best name for
followups? "Bart Schaefer"@candle.b (5133*)
Here's an alternative which I think betters `followup' on every one of
those points: Define a `Reply-Cc' field, with the semantics that the
address(es) in the Reply-Cc field should be copied to the Cc field of
the reply; the semantics of all existing fields remain unchanged, except
of course that the presence of Reply-To does not exclude the Reply-Cc.
Gives control to the original author: In approach #1, the originator
places the address of the mailing list in Reply-To and omits Reply-Cc.
In approach #2, the originator places his own address in Reply-Cc and
does whatever he likes with Reply-To. Using both provides approach #3.