Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ncar!boulder!gore!jacob From: jacob@gore.com (Jacob Gore) Newsgroups: gnu.config Subject: Re: Posting to GNU newsgroups is a no-no Message-ID: <780001@gore.com> Date: 2 Dec 89 05:59:01 GMT References: Reply-To: jacob@gore.com (Jacob Gore) Organization: Gore Enterprises Lines: 24 / gnu.config / weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU (Joe Weening) / Dec 1, 1989 / The problem isn't with the gatewaying in either direction. It's that messages originating on USENET are harder to reply to by mail, because brain-damaged software often screws up the headers. ---------- Not exactly. It's just that USENET programs are frequently mis-configured and produce Reply-To: or From: lines that are not useable (like "jane@gcm" or "john@hoph." -- just examples, I don't mean to pick on these two people (hi, John:-)). Then someone who needs to reply to the message (like RMS) tries using the accumulated Path: line, which is a generally a lost cause. If your software is configured to produce a useable Reply-To: header line or, in its absence, a useable From: line, then you can post away with no fear. Another issue is that if your question is very urgent, it will probably get to FSF people faster if you mail it to the list (because if you post it, it may take some time for it to work its way to Ohio State). But with the widespread use of NNTP, messages tend to move pretty quickly anyway. Jacob -- Jacob Gore Jacob@Gore.Com boulder!gore!jacob Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com