Re: reply-to set

> I disagree with noreply addresses on principle. They usually just
> represent the sender being lazy and not thinking hard enough about
> where replies should go. Why wouldn't there be a good reason to reply
> to an announcement? I've often wanted to reply to announcements.

Because the poster of the annoucement may be largely unrelated to its
content. Often the address to which any comments need to be addresses
is somewhere in the announcement text. The actual poster of the
announcement may be a community member posting on behalf of someone
else, or a PR company posting from an intern's address.

For a PostgreSQL release announcement, for example, we want anybody who
has a comment or question to send mail to press(at)postgresql(dot)org, NOT to
the sysadmin who posted the actual -announce email. Having a noreply@
mailing address would enforce that.

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com