[liberationtech] Vote results on "Reply to" Question

[Karl Fogel]

"M. Fioretti" <mfioretti at nexaima.net> writes:
>Karl,
>in this message from you there was one Reply-To header, set to:
>
>   Karl Fogel <kfogel at red-bean.com>,
>        liberationtech <liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu>

Thank you.  Then we're at least avoiding the "can't find my way back
home" problem, which is good.

>about the general issue: most decent email clients can recognize
>messages from mailing lists and allow their user to ignore the
>reply-to header. Which is what I (and many other people) do, on this
>and any other mailing list I'm subscribed to. You may set it to
>mickeymouse at mouseton.com, and by default my replies to all messages
>sent to liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu would still go ONLY to
>liberationtech at lists.stanford.edu

Oh, none of this is an issue for me personally.  My mail client is
heavily scripted & customized already.  I'm worried, instead, that
someone else will send a private message (say a private reply for my
eyes only) and have it accidentally go to the list.

I've seen this happen on other lists that add the list address to
Reply-to, and it's not pretty.  In other words, the failure mode of the
current setting is much more severe than the failure mode of "leave
Reply-to alone", since if someone accidentally sends a message privately
that should have been public, the recipient can always point this out
and then the sender can simply re-post to the list.  And that failure
mode makes everyone vulnerable, since what the private responder is
saying might contain information that is private about me too!

But that's always been the argument against the current setting.  If the
vote is that we live with this danger, then that's the vote.  At least
we're only adding to reply-to, never destroying any data.

-Karl