Re: [NOVICE] [OT] How to avoid using Reply-All on this list
Anthony E . Greene <agreene@pobox.com>
From: "Anthony E. Greene" <agreene@pobox.com>
To: pgsql-novice@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Date: 2000-06-02T15:11:24Z
Lists: pgsql-novice
At 09:41 2000-06-02 -0500, al wrote: >what a load! > >the solution is to FIX ONE LIST SERVER >not RIG A THOUSAND PROCMAILS > >what a backwards solution It has one advantage over the one you advocate (and which I tried): it works. >when something is setup wrong you fix it >dont adjust EVERYTHING ELSE You assume, incorrectly, that such a fix has not been attempted. >are you a MS programmer? Actually I'm someone who has already posted just such a suggestion and not received a response. I am subscribed to several lists where there is no Reply-To header. I could spend a lot of time trying to convince the list owners and perhaps get a consensus of influential subscribers for each list to support a change, or I could do what I did; make a suggestion, then fix my own problem with 10 minutes of coding and testing and move on to productive work. Sometimes there is a reason the list is configured without a Reply-To, whether I agree with that reason or not. In those cases, a local fix is the only practical solution. Rather than composing such a well considered response to my post, your time would have been better spent trying to get the list owners to change the lists. I sincerely hope you succeed. If you do, I'll send you the addresses of the other lists I know of that are similarly configured. If you don't want to spend your time trying to fix all those lists, I know of a procmail recipe that will do the trick... Tony -- Anthony E. Greene <agreene@pobox.com> PGP Key: 0x6C94239D/7B3D BD7D 7D91 1B44 BA26 C484 A42A 60DD 6C94 239D Linux: The choice of a GNU Generation.