Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 05:12:24 +0200 (MET DST) From: Eivind Eklund <perhaps@yes.no> To: joelh@gnu.ai.mit.edu Cc: perhaps@yes.no, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Reply-to addresses Message-ID: <199705160312.FAA29418@bitbox.follo.net> In-Reply-To: Joel Ray Holveck's message of Thu, 15 May 1997 12:39:10 -0400 References: <199705151403.QAA27442@bitbox.follo.net> <199705151639.MAA26073@ethanol.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > Hmmm... You mean, the copy sent to you by sendmail isn't filterable, > because it doesn't have a Sender: line? Why on earth would anybody > send something to the list by bcc? That would mean that replies > wouldn't hit the list! It has happened. Besides, filtering on Sender: allow me to split on which list this copy of this message is in, for cross-postings. > >Personally, I like to get a copy of the direct replies to my mails - > >couldn't we just have majordomo rewrite the Cc: line to only contain > >the mailing list if the mailing list was there, and reproduce the > >original Cc: as X-Cc: ? > >This will break anybody asking to be 'kept Cc:'ed', but nothing else, > >as far as I can tell. > > But getting multiple copies of messages is the behaviour we're trying > to stop! This whole exercise is futile without it. Read again. It will remove everybody on the Cc: lists, thus stopping you from getting multiple mails. However, it make it much harder to follow a discussion without being on the lists. I don't say that this is The Solution - it solves what I consider a non-problem. It give some advantages and some disadvantages. Then wiser people than me can find out how much of a problem it actually is to various subscribers, and whether to implement something. I personally consider anything solvable by a 4-line .procmail filter a non-problem. (This let you remove any mail Cc:'ed to a list you are subscribed to.) > Besides, the idea > of having a small group of participants Cc:'ed to each other is a good > one; on busy days, I can have an entire discussion with groups > quickly, even though our discussion might not hit the list until next > week. I've also found this convenient, but the problem has been minimized with the split of freefall/hub - mail delivery usually take about 5 minutes now. (For me, at least.) Eivind.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705160312.FAA29418>