Subject: news followup when followup-to: poster ?

From: "Alan J. Flavell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 14:46:12 GMT

When attempting to post a followup to an article where the poster has
specified Followup-to: poster, PINE (the version I'm using says it's
3.95a) automatically creates an email reply, without giving the
opportunity to post to the newsgroup (as well or instead).  Is there a
way to intervene in this?

One doesn't always want to limit further discussion to private email,
even if the original poster wanted it so.  I tried the related help, but
it didn't seem to throw light on this question. 

-- 

  "Come friendly Cancels, and fall on Spam" - as Betjeman didn't say

---

From: [email-masked] (Sven Guckes)
Date: 9 Feb 1997 17:40:57 GMT

[email-masked] (Alan J. Flavell):
> specified Followup-to: poster, PINE-3.95a automatically creates an email
> reply, without giving the opportunity to post to the newsgroup.

This is the way it was defined.  Thus it's not a bug but a feature.

Sven

---

From: Paul O Bartlett <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 17:02:46 -0500

On Sun, 9 Feb 1997, Alan J. Flavell wrote:

> way to intervene in this?  [...]

    This sounds like a problem with the version of Pine you are using. 
I am on version 3.94, and when I pressed 'R' to make a reply to your
post, Pine presented me with three standard choices (as it always
does):

1.  Post a followup to newsgroup;
2.  Reply to author by email;
3.  Do both at the same time.

I never had to do anything to get this behavior: it is automatic.

Paul                             <[email-masked]>
----------------------------------------------------------
Paul O. Bartlett, P.O. Box 857, Vienna, VA 22183-0857, USA
Finger, keyserver, or WWW for PGP 2.6.2 public key 
Home Page:  http://www.access.digex.net/~pobart

---

From: Andrej Borsenkow <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 17:23:34 +0300 (MSK)

> I never had to do anything to get this behavior: it is automatic.

Actually, it sounds more like a problem of _your_ version :-) RFC1036 (if
I remember the number right) states, that if Followup-To: contains single
word "poster", any followup should be mailed to athor's address and _not_
posted. So Pine 3.95 is quite correct on that matter.

greetings

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrej Borsenkow 		Fax:   +7 (095) 252 01 05
SNI ITS Moscow			Tel:   +7 (095) 252 13 88

NERV:  borsenkow.msk		E-Mail: [email-masked]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "Alan J. Flavell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 21:02:58 GMT

> posted. So Pine 3.95 is quite correct on that matter.

If the RFC says "should" rather than "must", then it's not wrong
for the client agent to allow the user to choose.

Thanks for the reference, though.  I hadn't noticed that the RFC
1036 says this:

    If the keyword poster is present, follow-up messages are not
    permitted.  The message should be mailed to the submitter of the
    message via mail.

Which appears to forbid the client from posting.  That's good, in a
way, since I routinely refuse email replies[*], so it'll save me time
and effort.  However, I think it's somewhat counterproductive.

[*]unless I perceive that it's a matter that really does require
personal handling; or the poster has made a convincing argument, e.g
offering a plausible promise to post a summary.