From ragnarok@pobox.com Thu Sep 27 19:13:13 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: raganok@intrex.net X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_4_1); 28 Sep 2001 02:12:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 90684 invoked from network); 28 Sep 2001 02:12:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.27) by 10.1.1.223 with QMQP; 28 Sep 2001 02:12:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO intrex.net) (209.42.192.250) by mta2 with SMTP; 28 Sep 2001 02:13:09 -0000 Received: from Craig [209.42.200.34] by intrex.net (SMTPD32-5.05) id ACB8E1BB009A; Thu, 27 Sep 2001 22:13:12 -0400 Reply-To: To: Subject: RE: [lojban] Bad Mailing List Behavior Considered Harmful (was: ThePleasures ofgoi (was: zipf computations & experimental cmavo)) Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 22:13:08 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 In-Reply-To: X-eGroups-From: "Craig" From: "Craig" >I never have to type one in. Does that mean my mailer good and yours is >broken? Both you and la rab.spir. have said something along these lines, thinking you are disagreeing. If the reply-to was munged, then to send a personal mail you would have to type the name in. I will now shut up as I feel both sides should, and will say no more on this topic unless asked a direct question (e.g. "Does that mean my mailer is good and yours is broken?"). I urge everyone on either side to do the same, as soon as they realize that everything useful has already been said. --la kreig.daniyl. 'segu le bavli temci gi mi'o renvi lo purci .i ga le fonxa janbe gi du mi' -la djimis.BYFet xy.sy. gubmau ckiku nacycme: 0x5C3A1E74