SOUTH-AFRICA-L Archives

Archiver > SOUTH-AFRICA > 2003-07 > 1057536802


From: Andrew Rodger <>
Subject: Re: [[ZA] Replies to the list]
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 10:13:22 +1000
In-Reply-To: <747HgFDGZ6288S07.1057462345@uwdvg007.cms.usa.net>


On Sunday, July 6, 2003, at 01:32 PM, Keith Meintjes wrote (and I am
replying to his rather than to Steve's, for the reason given below):

> Steve,
>
> As I understand it, when you send a message there are two fields:
> "From" and
> "Reply To". This goes to Rootsweb, which forwards the message to the
> list.
>
> There are two behaviours I have observed when replying to a message on
> the
> list:
>
> "Reply" sends a message to
> a) The list, or
> b) The original sender.
>
> "Reply All" sends a message to
> a) The list, twice, or
> b) The original sender and the list.
>
> Most messages are in group a). Steve Hayes is in group b).
>
> I have no idea how you would change your personal e-mail settings to
> elicit
> one or other of the behaviours.
>
> By the way, I think "Reply" should go to the list, "Reply All" should
> go to
> the list and to the original sender. Never happens.
>

What happens on my system is that ordinary letters addressed to me alone
do not have a "reply to" field in the header, and when I reply to them
the reply comes up addressed to the sender.

When the letter is addressed to me and others, or is a CC to me, the
"reply to" field is included and shows the sender's name. (You can also
"reply to all" those named by using the "Reply to All" button on the
mail toolbar, which is still there even if you have a single-addressee
message selected, but in that case does the same as the "Reply" button.)

Letters coming through Rootsweb all have a "reply to" field but its
contents vary according to sender. Keith's give Rootsweb in the "reply
to" field and Steve's give his own dunelm address. I feel this must be
due to something in the original sender's system. My own messages come
up with "reply to ROOTSWEB", so evidently, whatever it is, it's not done
by my system. It would be interesting to know how many of the variants
can co-exist in Microsoft mail applications (of which mine is not one --
I previously used Eudora Light and now have Mac OS X). It would be
interesting, too, to see whether the various mail-client program writers
can ever get their act together and make them all work alike!

Andrew Rodger


This thread: