"Chad C. Walstrom" <chewie at wookimus.net> wrote: > > Anyway, I did end up making my little Reply-To recipe nice and small: Erm, can you explain why Reply-To is so evil? I actually end up doing the opposite and adding Reply-To headers for some mailing lists that I'm on. Actually, I need to use Reply-To at work, since we use Lotus Notes over at the Carlson School. I came in and installed Linux on a system, didn't get around to putting together a Windows box for another year. Due to the annoying way Notes works, I ended up forwarding mail directly to my Linux box. Lotus decided to be `smart' and figured that instead of mhicks at csom.umn.edu, my directory entry should tell people to mail directly to my forwarding address, which ends up being something like mike@[12.34.56.78]. I set a Reply-To address on my outgoing mail (which is probably bad, since some mailing lists won't touch a pre-existing header), so people know to reply to my @csom address rather than my IP. -- _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ ___ _ _ __ The sooner you fall behind, / \/ \(_)| ' // ._\ / - \(_)/ ./| ' /(__ the more time you'll have \_||_/|_||_|_\\___/ \_-_/|_|\__\|_|_\ __) to catch up. [ Mike Hicks | http://umn.edu/~hick0088/ | mailto:hick0088 at tc.umn.edu ] -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://shadowknight.real-time.com/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20020222/7034b699/attachment.pgp