[mythtv-users] New installation, choppy video (not DMA) help request

[Michael T. Dean]

On 05/15/2006 11:56 AM, Steve Daniels wrote:

>It seems I'm in the wrong here.. When I click reply in (don't say a word)
>Outlook 2003, it puts your email address and the mailing lists' email
>address in the To: box. Hence you did actually receive an email from me.
>
>Hmm.. It only does this for certain limited number of people, and I assumed
>this was because of some option being set in their mailing list settings,
>but I can't find a corresponding option.
>
>Bizarre.
>

Believe it or not, Outlook is actually doing the right thing (here, at 
least).  Some users' mail clients put the user's address into a Reply-To 
header, other users' clients don't.  If the mailing list sees a Reply-To 
header, it simply adds itself to the header; otherwise, it explicitly 
adds a Reply-To using the list address.  Those whose clients put their 
own address into the Reply-To header will cause a proper client (and 
Outlook, it seems ;) to default to sending a reply to that user and to 
the list--regardless of whether you click Reply or Reply All.  Note, 
however, that the sender can always delete the non-list address from the 
message before sending.

It seems that GMail quite often (always?) puts the sender's address in 
the Reply-To header.  Also, many users of other clients (i.e. 
Thunderbird, Mozilla Mail, etc.) feel that they have to fill in the box 
for "Reply To" in their e-mail client's configuration.  When they do, 
their client will send a Reply-To header.

Also, the mailing list also allows you to specify that you should not 
receive a copy from the list if your address was in the "To" or "CC" 
headers.  I guess it was easier to do that than to force all users to 
make sure their e-mail clients are "properly configured".  Here, 
"properly configured" means if a message is sent by an individual and 
the From and Reply-To headers contain the same value, the Reply-To 
header should not be sent (one reason for my definition is the issue 
we're discussing :).

Mike