🚀 go-pugleaf

Neil Rickert writes:
>  However, in terms of dealing with mailing lists, I do not like LISTSERV.
> Sure, it does some thing well.  It also does some things poorly.  Far
> more serious than its "Reply-To:" folly is its bad habit of discarding
> existing "Message-ID:" headers.  This makes it much harder to track down
> problems such as mailing loops.

LISTSERV doesn't discard the Message-ID: header if you set the FULLHDR
option. Just send the command:

SET list-name FULLHDR

to the listserv address and you will get the original headers including
the Message-Id: header.

Also, the setting of the Reply-To: line is controlled by the list owner.
It can be configured to be either the sender or the list (and possibly
others). Many list owners set to the list thinking that that will
promote discussion on the list.  Remember that LISTSERV is a VM product,
and the most popular mailer for VM allows you to do either REPLY or
REPLY FROM (or something like that) to either reply to the Reply-To:
header or the From: header address.  This makes pointing the Reply-To:
header to the list reasonable, since the user can easily reply to the
list, or the the individual user with little effort. If your email
software doesn't support replying to the From: address as well as the
Reply-To: address, that is certainly not the fault of the LISTSERV
author, or the list owners who set up their lists in a way you
apparently don't like.
-- 
USmail: Bob Sloane, University of Kansas Computer Center, Lawrence, KS, 66045
E-mail: sloane@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu, sloane@ukanvax.bitnet, AT&T: (913)864-0444