Julian Mehnle wrote:
Martijn Lievaart [m...@rtij.nl] wrote:
12345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234
Sure, the client (MUA) could sent to the others and after the user
corrected the address send it to the address that was originally faulty.
It could even include the full cc list in that message. However, it has
no way to get the cc list correct in the first messages sent, one
address is not correct. Think about the suprise the users face when the
same mail has different cc-lists when delivered to different addresses.
No, not sending the message at all in the first place is correct (as in
prinicple of least surprise).
This inconsistency problem is mostly hypothetical because people shouldn't
learn new e-mail addresses from "To:" or "CC:" headers. This is a basic
privacy principle. If I send messages to recipients who don't know the
other recipient's addresses yet, I put the addresses in the "BCC:" field
instead of the "To:" or "CC:" fields. Or I set up a proper mailing list.
This is not hypothetical at all, on the contrairy! I often converse with
a lot of people in loose knitted groups, both at work and privately. In
that environment, one assumes that one can reply to all people by
pressing the reply-all command. It is most unfortunate if one of your
holiday partners misses important instructions because someone was left
out of the to or cc list accidentily.
However, I'm very well willing to leave it up to the mail client (or a
configuration option thereof) whether a message with an invalid recipient
address is completely abandoned from being sent or whether the invalid
address is just skipped. But in any case there's nothing that should be
fixed on Courier's side.
I agreed until I read the rest of this thread. The part where you agree
courier should be fixed :-)
M4
17 messages in net.sourceforge.lists.courier-usersRe: [courier-users] RE: How to remove...
