Subject:
|
Re: Allow posting & FUT to member email
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.suggestions
|
Date:
|
Tue, 9 Apr 2002 03:13:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1894 times
|
| |
|
|
William R Ward <bill@wards.net> writes:
> "Ross Crawford" <rcrawford@csi.com> writes:
> > In lugnet.admin.finance, Scott Arthur writes:
> > > In lugnet.admin.finance, Ross Crawford writes:
> > > > In lugnet.admin.finance, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > > >
> > > > > FUT /dev/null
> > > >
> > > > or lugnet.bit-bucket???? http://news.lugnet.com/admin/suggestions/?n=20
> > >
> > >
> > > Why not just allow FUT the posters own e-mail address?
> >
> > Maybe allow member.nnn in the posting / follow-up fields?
> >
> > Or even just a "to mail" checkbox for each?
>
> The standard NNTP behavior is to set "Followup-To: poster" in the
> header.
>
> I'm doing that on this message, let's see if it works.
Looks like it works just fine (I overrode the followup-to rule in
order to post this message). If you try to reply to the above message
in NNTP it sends e-mail. Does it do the same for web and SMTP users?
If so, we've got our answer - put it in the FAQ and call this one
done.
--Bill.
--
William R Ward bill@wards.net http://www.wards.net/~bill/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Allow posting & FUT to member email
|
| (...) Strongly disagree. As I said offline (and that's annoying in and of itself, having to say things twice because of an not easily overrideable FUT), this breaks threading. Since from the web there is no easy way to override the FUT without (...) (23 years ago, 9-Apr-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
Message is in Reply To:
36 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
