From a99eacbd560cf313596cfbf7f1a78fcba311aa71 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Neale Pickett Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2020 13:22:46 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] Fix now-broken links --- papers/reply-to-still-harmful.md | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.md b/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.md index 3f07517..3557b32 100644 --- a/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.md +++ b/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.md @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ out that: In 2000 (or maybe earlier), Simon Hill wrote a response called [Reply-To Munging Considered -Useful](http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.mhtml), which is +Useful](reply-to/useful.html), which is frequently offered as a rebuttal to Chip's document in online debates. Simon's response boils down to the following: @@ -163,8 +163,8 @@ References Harmful](http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html) ([mirror](reply-to/harmful.html)) * [Reply-To Munging Considered - Useful](http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.mhtml) - ([mirror](reply-to/useful.html)) + Useful](reply-to/useful.html) + ([original URL, which is offline in June 2020](http://www.metasystema.net/essays/reply-to.mhtml)) * [RFC 822](http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc822.txt): _STANDARD FOR THE FORMAT OF ARPA INTERNET TEXT MESSAGES_ * [RFC 2822](http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2822.txt): _Internet Message