[Users] reply-to-list annoyance

[Michael]

Sorry now i run into trouble myself :/ i didn't keep the followups and have to reply like this, i believe it's better than back-forking a thread ? And there isn't a way to pick up a thread ID from the archive, no?

I wanted to reply to Steve, and Paul...(Jan 30/31)

@Paul,

> this is not Claws fault, but mine and only mine

Paul, whatever your little sloppyness, it's certainly going to be done by others too, and as Ian Z. pointed out, there are cases when it even makes sense. Yes, it's not claws' fault. I think it is a general weakness in the workflow (by both the MUA and the use) and deserves a look.  

@Steve,

> The sender who isn't subscribed is a rude, self-centered fool 

I wasn't so much aware that you can easily post to some lists even w/o subscription. And i have to say, i'd have welcomed that feature occasionally in the past, when i wrote to discussion members in private instead. Good or bad, it is something a MUA could deal with.

So, in a nutshell, the problem starts when someone writes to a list with a 'reply to', or if the private address was set TO: over the list address set into CC: ? 
If that's the case, then how about a MUS makes sure that, if a list address is used, it's always set TO: and *anything* else in CC: ? Would that possibly create more problems than it solves, when in the worst case (when some MUA drops the CCs) the sender had to lookup the answer in the archive, which IMHO is reasonable ? And to clarify, the MUA would drop the 'reply-to' and set the senders private address into CC: too.

I think that if someone adds CCs, then list replies (by MUA) should keep those CCs. But im not sure what mailman does with it.