1) As per https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3834, the "Precedence: bulk"
header's SOLE purpose is to signal mailers that this is autogenerated
mail, so they shall not auto-reply to it. Full stop.

2) The same RFC recommends setting "Auto-Submitted: <anything but `no'>"
instead and doesn't recommend to use "Precedence:";
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5436 updates the RFC, suggesting some
more specific values for the header.

3) Setting "Reply-To:<>" instead is a "hard" solution - no one will _be
able_ to reply (though Outlook/Exchange (2003) is reported to use
"From:" instead sometimes
(https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/exchange/en-US/72e7608a-9ff1-43c3-b6dd-454dafc67672/replyto-address-is-not-used-bei-out-of-office-replies?forum=exchangesvrclientslegacy)),
another one is to set it (and possibly "From:") to a "black hole"
address like "noreply@<domain>".

4) But 3) doesn't look like an option for Roundup because one can reply
to threads by replying to notifications AFAIK.

5) Mailer support for "Auto-Submitted:": supported by Lotus Domino
(https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRA-15325), unsupported by Exchange
2007 (message 2011, linked blog post 2006) but "Precedence:" supported
(http://stackoverflow.com/a/7316397/648265), supported by GMail
(https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/apps/INFoYJFBDrI/F9YCFjOrYB0J).
Other mailers I know of do not have auto-reply functionality out of the box.

---

C1) As per 1), the university server admins are completely wrong to drop
these unconditionally and shall be directed to the RFCs, this discussion
and other related references here.
C2) As per 5), we cannot drop "Precedence:" quite yet (unless someone
digs up evidence that the bulk of Exchange servers on duty - used by
tech people, at least - now support the new header)
C3) but as per 2), it may be good to complement it with
"Auto-submitted:" in accordance with the newer RFC.