[sylpheed:30211] Re: Bcc: missing for sender & receiver

Randy Dunlap rdunlap at xenotime.net
Sat Oct 21 07:12:58 JST 2006

On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 17:00:06 -0500 Gene Goldenfeld wrote:

> bojster <sylpheed at bojster.net> wrote:
> >Gene Goldenfeld wrote:
> >
> >> I didn't suggest that the Bcc should show up in the header of the
> >> recipient. Many, if not most programs - and I vaguely recalled in
> >> Sylpheed 2.2.9 and earlier -- let the receiver know it's a Bcc with text
> >> in brackets or parentheses within the message itself.  Run a test in
> >> 2.2.9 and check.  That's an extremely vital piece of information to
> >> convey to the receiver, and can't be left to the hope that they will
> >> study the header and deduce they got a Bcc. I discovered the missing
> >> Bcc sending test messages to myself today, after noticing it wasn't in
> >> the my copy's header.  I'm using 2.3.0b3 and wanted to alert Hiro to
> >> the matter.  

I just tested 2.2.9 (on Linux) and see no such indication.

> >OK, then I guess I misunderstood you. I did run a test (and I have
> >already told you some of its results - that BCC is in the header of the
> >message saved in 'sent'). In 2.2.9 there is absolutely no indication
> >that a BCC is a BCC (though it's easy to tell by the fact that the
> >recipient is neither the addressee nor the copy-receiver) and to be
> >honest I have never seen anything like that (unless you mean, for
> >example, mailing list's code in square brackets prefixed to the
> >subject). Why is it important to tell the receiver they got a BCC anyway
> >(I'm asking out of the curiosity)? Or why is it important to
> >distinguish CC from BCC in such cases (as it's obvious that when the
> >receiver doesn't see their address in 'To:', then it's either CC or
> >BCC)?
> >
> So the Bcc recipient knows quickly that's what their role in the
> communication is, and also doesn't turn around and mistakenly do a Reply
> All.  

spammers wouldn't like that?  :)

I wouldn't want to see any MUA muck around with the body text.
Maybe after the .sig if at all.

But would doing so anywhere also mess up any PGP/GPG signature?
I suppose that the BCC: notification would just be included in
that, if it's needed...


More information about the Sylpheed mailing list