Path: utzoo!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cwjcc!hal!ncoast!allbery
From: allbery@NCoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery)
Newsgroups: news.software.b
Subject: Re: Just how useful is crossposting?
Message-ID: <1989Nov14.195710.11774@NCoast.ORG>
Date: 14 Nov 89 19:57:10 GMT
References: <47326@looking.on.ca>
Reply-To: allbery@ncoast.ORG (Brandon S. Allbery)
Followup-To: news.software.b
Organization: North Coast Public Access UN*X, Cleveland, OH
Lines: 31

As quoted from <47326@looking.on.ca> by brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Templeton):
+---------------
| I would think that perhaps if an original article is crossposted, we should
| get down to it and insist the followups be in one group.  That should either
| be a group picked in a followup-to line, or the first group, or followers-up
| should be asked to pick which of the groups they are going to reply within.
+---------------

Once again, with feeling:  (Remove the trailing "\" from each line and join
into a single long line.)

-ENEWSHEADER="Newsgroups: %F\\nSubject: Re: %S\\nReferences: %i\\n\
Followup-To: %(%F=^\\([^,]*\\),.*$?%1:%F)\\nDistribution: %D\\n\
Organization: %o\\n\\n"

The expression in the Followup-To: line automatically forces Followup-To: to
specify the first newsgroup of the cross-post list.  Truly paranoid sysadmins
might want to copy the expression to the Newsgroups: line as well.

Note that this now incorporates the "% interp buffer overflow" hack of
including only the previous article in the References: line.  Also note that
I have removed the Reply-To: line, which is redundant, unnecessary, and
requires a hard-coded domain (ugh).

++Brandon
-- 
Brandon S. Allbery    allbery@NCoast.ORG, BALLBERY (MCI Mail), ALLBERY (Delphi)
uunet!hal.cwru.edu!ncoast!allbery ncoast!allbery@hal.cwru.edu bsa@telotech.uucp
*(comp.sources.misc mail to comp-sources-misc[-request]@backbone.site, please)*
*Third party vote-collection service: send mail to allbery@uunet.uu.net (ONLY)*
expnet.all: Experiments in *net management and organization.  Mail me for info.