[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Reply-to option for the list?
- To: <dinosaur@usc.edu>
- Subject: Re: Reply-to option for the list?
- From: "Richard W. Travsky" <rtravsky@uwyo.edu>
- Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:46:39 -0600
- Authentication-results: msg-ip0.usc.edu; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
- In-reply-to: <4F951F9D.2030302@gmx.at>
- References: <CAN=3F1hHiH416SQ3SFVngwkr_HX_+NhCBZG98iHt7B2ThcnyYg@mail.gmail.com> <CACnMvBYRVgbmQKVOSAoiQN6AJPjrSF5xzsPZX9=gRaG+bY+8og@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: rtravsky@uwyo.edu
- Sender: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu
On Mon, 23 Apr 2012, David Marjanovic wrote:
The current behaviour is correct. See this detailed explanation:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
Of all e-mail programs on this planet, that page (written in 2002) mentions
two: Elm and Pine. I didn't even know Elm existed, and Pine is _so_ last
millennium... The vast bulk of people today uses Outlook Express, Outlook,
Just as a side note - I use pine as it's quick and dirty AND has
NO java or javascript, good for examining suspicious emails (part of my
job, actually).
I wish I had a quatloo for every pc I've disinfected because of email
(and two quatloos for each infected by web site)