[Mutt] Re: Group reply To-vs-Cc recipients

[Will Yardley]

On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 06:41:17PM -0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> If you convert the mailing list concept to a group of "To" recipients
> instead, the same logic can apply.  A sends an email to B,C,D as a group
> conversation, "Where should we have lunch today".  B may respond to A's
> email, but her desire is to reply equally to all the other primary (to)
> recipients.  Her group-reply ought to put A,C,D in the To field.  This
> continues the indication that it's a group conversation whose primary
> recipients still include C and D.
> 
> I believe this pattern of conversation is more common now-a-days, and that
> it deserves support in the MUA.

I _think_ I understand what's being asked / suggested here. To me, it
seems mostly cosmetic (and adjustable if you're willing to move them
around in your editor).

I guess I kind of have to agree with the folks who think that this
doesn't really need to be configurable, and in fact, making it
configurable might cause more confusion than it solves?

w