And *I* prefer the opposite :) Mainly because changing Reply-To:
overwrites any Reply-To: that the original author had.  I'd rather
have the choice and hit either R or F as appropriate, and possibly
send someone an extra copy of the message, than risk a situation where
I can't reply to the author at all.

Furthermore, with the munging you can't tell the difference between
reply-to-author and reply-to-list at all; thus it is easy to reply to
the list by accident, potentially posting information you only meant
to send to the author individually.

For a quite long rant *against* reply-to munging, check out:

    http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html


I guess not everyone will be happy until there is a special mail
header that specifies the address to reply to address for the mailing
list the message is on, if any.  I believe there is such a header
proposed (Followup-to: ?) and implemented in certain mail readers, but
I can't find a reference at the moment....


Lex




Jarvis, Robert P. writes:
 > For what it's worth I prefer lists which default to replying to the
 > list.
 > 99+% of the time I want my replies to go to the list, and it's a real
 > aggravation to have to remember to change the 'To:' line.
 > 
 > Bob Jarvis
 > The Timken Company
 > 
 > >-----Original Message-----
 > >From:	Bijan Parsia [SMTP:bparsia at email.unc.edu]
 > >Sent:	Monday, June 29, 1998 12:43 PM
 > >To:	squeak at cs.uiuc.edu
 > >Subject:	Re: REQUEST: Polling PWS Use
 > >
 > >Whoops, that was supposed to go to Mark, not the list.
 > >
 > ><sigh> The PWS list defaults replying to the author, and the Squeak list
 > >defaults replying to the list. Any hope that we can have them synched in
 > >this respect?
 > >
 > >Cheers,
 > >Bijan Parsia.
 > >
 > 
 >