From xemacs-m  Tue Dec 31 16:50:39 1996
Received: from UCSD.EDU (mailbox2.ucsd.edu [132.239.1.54])
          by xemacs.cs.uiuc.edu (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP
	  id QAA24106 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Tue, 31 Dec 1996 16:50:39 -0600 (CST)
Received: from sdnp5.ucsd.edu (sdnp5.ucsd.edu [132.239.79.10]) by UCSD.EDU (8.8.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id OAA28457 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Tue, 31 Dec 1996 14:50:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by sdnp5.ucsd.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id OAA18275; Tue, 31 Dec 1996 14:48:40 -0800
Sender: dmoore@sdnp5.ucsd.edu
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: VM 5.97 released
References: <QQbvfz13214.199612222156@crystal.WonderWorks.COM> 	<vk681tnnrr.fsf@suomi.i-have-a-misconfigured-system-so-shoot-me> 	<m2enghm6g9.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> 	<vkvi9t6og1.fsf@suomi.i-have-a-misconfigured-system-so-shoot-me> 	<QQbwfy24179.199612292231@crystal.WonderWorks.COM> 	<m2loagiwpb.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> 	<QQbwgo27957.199612300244@crystal.WonderWorks.COM> 	<m2ohfcc5uq.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> 	<QQbwjo16591.199612302213@crystal.WonderWorks.COM> 	<m2916egyi4.fsf@altair.xemacs.org> <QQbwni09822.199612312241@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
X-Face: "oX;zS#-JU$-,WKSzG.1gGE]x^cIg!hW.dq>.f6pzS^A+(k!T|M:}5{_%>Io<>L&{hO7W4cicOQ|>/lZ1G(m%7iaCf,6Qgk0%%Bz7b2-W3jd0m_UG\Y;?]}4s0O-U)uox>P3JN)9cm]O\@,vy2e{`3pb!"pqmRy3peB90*2L
Mail-Copies-To: never
From: David Moore <dmoore@UCSD.EDU>
Date: 31 Dec 1996 14:48:39 -0800
In-Reply-To: Kyle Jones's message of Tue, 31 Dec 1996 17:41:05 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <rvn2uuqqig.fsf@sdnp5.ucsd.edu>
Lines: 24
X-Mailer: Red Gnus v0.76/XEmacs 19.15

Kyle Jones <kyle_jones@wonderworks.com> writes:
> Steven L. Baur writes:
>  > Kyle> This has a greasy feel to it.  The real solution is duplicate
>  > Kyle> suppression in the MUA.
>  > 
>  > It's not really.  What's broken is how `reply all' or the equivalent
>  > is used indiscriminantly, and without thought for the recipient.
>  > Mail-Copies-To: is an automatic solution to a highly annoying default.
> 
> One problem with it is that the sender specifies not only whether
> they receive replies but also whether any of the recipients
> receive replies.  The sender might not have sufficient knolwedge
> to decide.  Duplicate messages are better than no message at all.

	The Mail-Copies-To specifes what address to place into the Cc:
list of a wide reply for the _sender_ of the previous message, not any
other Cc'd or To'd people.  So you are only controlling responses to
yourself, not to others.

-- 
David Moore <dmoore@ucsd.edu>       | Computer Systems Lab      __o
UCSD Dept. Computer Science - 0114  | Work: (619) 534-8604    _ \<,_
La Jolla, CA 92093-0114             | Fax:  (619) 534-1445   (_)/ (_)
<URL:http://oj.egbt.org/dmoore/>    |

