[ABQ-pm] new mailing list test

[Allan Emord]

Hmmm.
I hadn't given this issue much thought - until now. As an administrator
and a user, I have side with Linda on this one. 
The less we change base data the better off we are. When we automate
"changes" or more correcty translations, we lose sight of the source
data both in content and true source. Do not "munge" it. Keep it clean.
Keep it simple.


Allan Emord
dba/systems programmer
Laguna Industries, Inc
PO box 1001 
Laguna, NM  87026 
voice: (505) 839 6349
fax:      (505) 552-7642


>>> "Linda L. Julien" <leira at MIT.EDU> 10/11/2005 16:12:31 >>>
havoc wrote:
> Can you set mailman to change the return address to the list rather 
> than the individual who sent the message?

Technically: Yes, easily.

Religiously: Well, I'm not so sure.

I'm one of those people who feels very very strongly that mailing
lists
should not modify the Reply-To header that is set by the sender.  I
believe that the RFCs support this.

For a well-written explanation of this side of the debate, see
'"Reply-To" Munging Considered Harmful' at
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html.  I find the "Principle
of Least Damage" argument particularly compelling, as I've seen that
sort of situation entirely too often.

That being said, if the members of the list have an overwhelming
desire
to have it go the other way, I'll back down, though you may catch me
on
the occasional soapbox.

So, what does this mean?  A poll.  Eh, the last question was closed
anyway.

> If not, procmail will be happy to do it for me, but I thought I'd 
> ask.

I think that's a great option, actually (says the person who until
recently had a .emacs file that did much the same).

I'd love to hear what others have to say on the topic.

Linda
_______________________________________________
Albuquerque-pm mailing list
Albuquerque-pm at pm.org 
http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/albuquerque-pm