Re: [Leica] partially OT: a concrete example of Microsoft badness

["Mxsmanic" <mxsmanic@hotmail.com>]

You must be talking about Microsoft Exchange or something.  When I do a simple
reply in Outlook Express, it is routed to the "Reply-To" address in the headers.
Unfortunately, I don't remember the specifics of how Microsoft Exchange behaves,
but my guess is that there is probably some security-related reason for the
behavior.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Reid" <reid@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 19:26
Subject: [Leica] partially OT: a concrete example of Microsoft badness


> Blind carbon copy.
>
> Note: this message is entirely about email and not about cameras or list
manners.
>
> Anybody who has been on the LUG longer than a year or so has heard me complain
about the headaches that Microsoft email software causes list owners. All of
this argument with and about Anthony A has caused people to forward messages
around, which I can quote here to show you what I am talking about.
>
> Here is a recent message sent by Anthony, as displayed by Microsoft email
software:
>
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Mxsmanic
> Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 2:48 AM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] OT: new C**** lens for improved Bokeh
>
> Here is the same message, as displayed by standards-compliant email software:
>
> From: Mxsmanic <mxsmanic@hotmail.com>
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] OT: new C**** lens for improved Bokeh
> Date-Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2001 2:48 AM +0200
>
> There are a few minor differences (MS doesn't show the timezone of the date;
different keyword name for the date).
>
> But there is one major showstopper difference. The Microsoft email progam
shows the wrong From information. Here is the text of the Internet email
standard that applies here (RFC822, section 4.4.4):
>
>       o   The "Sender" field mailbox should be sent  notices  of
>                 any  problems in transport or delivery of the original
>                 messages.  If there is no  "Sender"  field,  then  the
>                 "From" field mailbox should be used.
>
>  -->        o   The  "Sender"  field  mailbox  should  NEVER  be  used
>                 automatically, in a recipient's reply message.
>
>             o   If the "Reply-To" field exists, then the reply  should
>                 go to the addresses indicated in that field and not to
>                 the address(es) indicated in the "From" field.
>
>             o   If there is a "From" field, but no  "Reply-To"  field,
>                 the  reply should be sent to the address(es) indicated
>                 in the "From" field.
>
> The standard requires that replies never go to the "Sender" field, but that is
the only field that Microsoft email software displays. It does not even give you
enough information to do the right thing by hand.
>
> The reason that I care even though I don't use this software, is that people
who use Microsoft email software have more difficulty being good citizens on an
email list.  When people who are not Email experts use Microsoft email programs,
they don't have enough information to be able to send off-list messages to
people, so either they send on-list messages or they ask me for the person's
email address. It also generates a steady stream of message sent to the list
maintenance mailbox (owner-leica-users) that people think is going to somebody
else.
>
> I guess if you're rich enough, like Microsoft, you can ignore the rules and do
what you want, but this particular flouting of the rules makes the world a worse
place.
>
>
>