The problem of course is broken email clients lacking features. Hey, most email lists these days send messages out with a "list-id" header that would allow my email client to have a "Reply to list" function, as well as "Reply to Sender", and "Reply to all", all of which could function independently of the reply-to header.

But my email client doesn't even have a 'reply to sender'. It has 'reply' which respects reply-to, and "reply to all"---which theoretically includes all addresses in to,from,cc,etc., but sometimes seems to insist on only including the reply-to address whether I like it or not! Sometimes the only way I can reply to the sender is to actually copy and paste the address manually! Ridiculous!

Of course, if the email client had all the features I want, I don't know if the regular non-geek would use em. But I see enough people of varying levels of technological expertise doing the "send to list when I meant to send to individual" thing, often in really embarsessing ways, that I suspect a "reply to list" vs 'reply to function' feature would be high desired. Even better, how about some kind of obvious cue (color coding of message window?) to let you know which you are doing. Some usability testing is called for.

Anyway, what were we talking about?

Jonathan


>>> Erik Hatcher <[log in to unmask]> 03/30/07 1:45 PM >>>
On Mar 30, 2007, at 1:40 PM, Daniel Chudnov wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Mar 2007, Ross Singer wrote:
>
>> Well that probably didn't need to go to the whole world, but there
>> you go.
>
> /me votes for turning off reply-to munging on this list.

-1   - replies should go to lists.  :)   i know, i know, its a very
charged issue, but i feel strongly that an e-mail list is about
community and i can easily hit reply-to-sender in my mail interface
if i want to send something privately.   and i am very aware that
others feel strongly on the opposite side of this issue.

        Erik