Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 8 Sep 2016, at 16:43, John D. Muccigrosso wrote: Yes. It still doesn’t work for me. Version 2.0BETA (6054) I'm afraid it's only in the 1.9.5 release at this time :) (The Sierra release date is now official. My focus will be on getting 1.9.5 out of beta state and also completing an update of the homepage.) -- Benny ___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 8 Sep 2016, at 10:43, John D. Muccigrosso wrote: On 8 Sep 2016, at 3:51, Benny Kjær Nielsen wrote: On 8 Sep 2016, at 1:05, John D. Muccigrosso wrote: My issue with bcc is that when I “reply” to one in my sent mail, the bcc’ed addresses from the original don’t show up. I’d prefer they were back in the bcc on the new message. I believe this was (recently) fixed when I fixed an issue with editing drafts with customized Bcc headers. Am I wrong? Yes. It still doesn’t work for me. Version 2.0BETA (6054) FWIW, it does seem to work for me on version 1.9.5 (5260), although I've only done a quick test so far. Shoshanna Green shoshan...@gmail.com ___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 8 Sep 2016, at 3:51, Benny Kjær Nielsen wrote: On 8 Sep 2016, at 1:05, John D. Muccigrosso wrote: My issue with bcc is that when I “reply” to one in my sent mail, the bcc’ed addresses from the original don’t show up. I’d prefer they were back in the bcc on the new message. I believe this was (recently) fixed when I fixed an issue with editing drafts with customized Bcc headers. Am I wrong? Yes. It still doesn’t work for me. Version 2.0BETA (6054) John ___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 7 Sep 2016, at 23:20, Patrik Fältström wrote: On 7 Sep 2016, at 17:05, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: That's what I do, too, which suggests an even more stringent mechanism: put the original To/Cc lines into the body of the bcc copy. Yes, it's an extra SMTP, but so is doing it manually. FWIW, I do not use BCC either (some people use to too much, like instead of mailing lists or alias expansion on server side), but WHEN I do it, I would like it to be more clear. Sure, in some cases I send the first mail, and then forward the sent mail to the "bcc" recipient like "FYI, look what I did send". But then maybe THAT should be the feature (which seems to be similar to what you suggest as well)? Both of the above are interesting ideas. The latter might be less confusing for recipients since it'll just automate what several of you already do instead of using `Bcc:`. It's also closer to what MailMate can already do. In fact, I think it might be possible to create a bundle command which offered some kind of “Send and Forward” command, but to really work well then it would probably also require me to add a bit of functionality. I'll give it some thought. -- Benny ___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 8 Sep 2016, at 1:05, John D. Muccigrosso wrote: My issue with bcc is that when I “reply” to one in my sent mail, the bcc’ed addresses from the original don’t show up. I’d prefer they were back in the bcc on the new message. I believe this was (recently) fixed when I fixed an issue with editing drafts with customized Bcc headers. Am I wrong? -- Benny ___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 8 Sep 2016, at 1:04, Richard Rettke wrote:
> On 7 Sep 2016, at 2:54, Patrik Fältström p...@frobbit.se wrote:
>
>> "IMPORTANT! This message has been blind-carbon-copied to you. Do not
>> reply-to-all or forward it without the author's permission."
>>
>> This text was added to the email body for all bcc recipients.
>
> In some respects it's rather surprising that email clients and web based
> email, even allow a Reply All to a BCC list. You have no idea who you're
> replying too.
Well, the receiver do not know he was bcc:ed. There was an envelope To address
with his email address.
What I think you say is that "it is surprising that an email client is allowing
(not warning) if one do reply-all if none of the email addresses in To: or Cc:
headers are known"?
This email for example, that I am doing reply-all on have
mailmate@lists.freron.com on it. My email client could know I am on that list
(valid To/Cc) but I could have been bcc:ed. How can it know?
> Just to be flexible I would think a preference option that simply disables
> the ability to do a reply all to a BCC list would be in order. Certainly
> would not solve the problem for all the other clients but perhaps a step in
> the right direction.
That would help _me_, but not the ones I send bcc to (i.e. receiver of my email
messages).
I see these as two different problems.
To warn me as a sender that I am using bcc ("Do you really want to bcc people
and not Cc?") might also be ok. But I think the bcc header is already today in
MailMate "hidden" enough so that the risk for the MM user doing the wrong thing
(Bcc instead of Cc) is extremely small.
paf
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
mailmate mailing list
mailmate@lists.freron.com
https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 7 Sep 2016, at 17:20, John D. Muccigrosso wrote: On 7 Sep 2016, at 19:11, Randall Meadows wrote: On 7 Sep 2016, at 17:05, John D. Muccigrosso wrote: My issue with bcc is that when I “reply” to one in my sent mail, the bcc’ed addresses from the original don’t show up. I’d prefer they were back in the bcc on the new message. Then you'd be able to see who was BCC'ed, defeating the entire point of BCC. I can see them. It’s in my sent mail, so I sent it. Have a look at one of your own to see. Ah, replying *to your own sent message*, missed that detail, mea culpa. Yeah, I imagine this is an implementation detail to simplify not having to special case for that situation. I agree, that'd be a nice feature, albeit a very niche one.___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 7 Sep 2016, at 19:11, Randall Meadows wrote: On 7 Sep 2016, at 17:05, John D. Muccigrosso wrote: My issue with bcc is that when I “reply” to one in my sent mail, the bcc’ed addresses from the original don’t show up. I’d prefer they were back in the bcc on the new message. Then you'd be able to see who was BCC'ed, defeating the entire point of BCC. I can see them. It’s in my sent mail, so I sent it. Have a look at one of your own to see. John ___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 7 Sep 2016, at 17:05, John D. Muccigrosso wrote: My issue with bcc is that when I “reply” to one in my sent mail, the bcc’ed addresses from the original don’t show up. I’d prefer they were back in the bcc on the new message. Then you'd be able to see who was BCC'ed, defeating the entire point of BCC. ___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
My issue with bcc is that when I “reply” to one in my sent mail, the bcc’ed addresses from the original don’t show up. I’d prefer they were back in the bcc on the new message. John ___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 7 Sep 2016, at 2:54, Patrik Fältström p...@frobbit.se wrote: "IMPORTANT! This message has been blind-carbon-copied to you. Do not reply-to-all or forward it without the author's permission." This text was added to the email body for all bcc recipients. In some respects it's rather surprising that email clients and web based email, even allow a Reply All to a BCC list. You have no idea who you're replying too. Just to be flexible I would think a preference option that simply disables the ability to do a reply all to a BCC list would be in order. Certainly would not solve the problem for all the other clients but perhaps a step in the right direction. __*Richard Rettke*__ *Laus Deo* *Non sibi sed patriae* https://about.me/rerettke ___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 7 Sep 2016, at 17:05, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: > That's what I do, too, which suggests an even more stringent mechanism: put > the original To/Cc lines into the body of the bcc copy. Yes, it's an extra > SMTP, but so is doing it manually. FWIW, I do not use BCC either (some people use to too much, like instead of mailing lists or alias expansion on server side), but WHEN I do it, I would like it to be more clear. Sure, in some cases I send the first mail, and then forward the sent mail to the "bcc" recipient like "FYI, look what I did send". But then maybe THAT should be the feature (which seems to be similar to what you suggest as well)? paf signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 7 Sep 2016, at 10:45, Shoshanna Green wrote: On 7 Sep 2016, at 10:11, Patrik Fältström wrote: On 7 Sep 2016, at 15:47, Benny Kjær Nielsen wrote: On 7 Sep 2016, at 9:54, Patrik Fältström wrote: One thing that I think it was Eudora that introduced, was to add a "signature" at the beginning of the message body that read: "IMPORTANT! This message has been blind-carbon-copied to you. Do not reply-to-all or forward it without the author's permission." I guess that makes sense, but it's not so easily added to MailMate. Honestly, BCC is risky enough, even with a warning like that, that I generally don't use it. If I want to secretly loop someone in on an email I'm sending to someone else, I usualy send the message and then forward my own copy of it to the person I might have BCCed. All the benefits of secret backchannel communication, none of the risks of getting outed by an accidental reply-all ;) That's what I do, too, which suggests an even more stringent mechanism: put the original To/Cc lines into the body of the bcc copy. Yes, it's an extra SMTP, but so is doing it manually. ___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 7 Sep 2016, at 10:11, Patrik Fältström wrote: On 7 Sep 2016, at 15:47, Benny Kjær Nielsen wrote: On 7 Sep 2016, at 9:54, Patrik Fältström wrote: One thing that I think it was Eudora that introduced, was to add a "signature" at the beginning of the message body that read: "IMPORTANT! This message has been blind-carbon-copied to you. Do not reply-to-all or forward it without the author's permission." I guess that makes sense, but it's not so easily added to MailMate. Honestly, BCC is risky enough, even with a warning like that, that I generally don't use it. If I want to secretly loop someone in on an email I'm sending to someone else, I usualy send the message and then forward my own copy of it to the person I might have BCCed. All the benefits of secret backchannel communication, none of the risks of getting outed by an accidental reply-all ;) Shoshanna Green shoshan...@gmail.com ___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 7 Sep 2016, at 15:47, Benny Kjær Nielsen wrote: > On 7 Sep 2016, at 9:54, Patrik Fältström wrote: > >> One thing that I think it was Eudora that introduced, was to add a >> "signature" at the beginning of the message body that read: >> >> "IMPORTANT! This message has been blind-carbon-copied to you. Do not >> reply-to-all or forward it without the author's permission." >> >> This text was added to the email body for all bcc recipients. > > I guess that makes sense, but it's not so easily added to MailMate. MailMate > removes the Bcc header before sending via SMTP, but it's still only sent once > to the server. The above would require it to be sent twice -- with and > without the warning. Correct. >> Maybe as a "signature" that is added only to To, Cc or Bcc recipients? > > I don't think it should be part of the signature system. I can agree with that :-) >> And then set location (top, bottom,...). >> >> Or just add a fixed text to all bcc, if one wants that? > > Given its nature, wouldn't it always be top if one wanted to use this? Yes. Of course! But a signature can be in multiple places, but given we will not go down the signature path... paf signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
Re: [MlMt] Feature Request: BCC warning/intro
On 7 Sep 2016, at 9:54, Patrik Fältström wrote: One thing that I think it was Eudora that introduced, was to add a "signature" at the beginning of the message body that read: "IMPORTANT! This message has been blind-carbon-copied to you. Do not reply-to-all or forward it without the author's permission." This text was added to the email body for all bcc recipients. I guess that makes sense, but it's not so easily added to MailMate. MailMate removes the Bcc header before sending via SMTP, but it's still only sent once to the server. The above would require it to be sent twice -- with and without the warning. Maybe as a "signature" that is added only to To, Cc or Bcc recipients? I don't think it should be part of the signature system. And then set location (top, bottom,...). Or just add a fixed text to all bcc, if one wants that? Given its nature, wouldn't it always be top if one wanted to use this? -- Benny ___ mailmate mailing list mailmate@lists.freron.com https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
