Charles Lindsey wrote:
In <415CAC7B(_dot_)1050108(_at_)erols(_dot_)com> Bruce Lilly
<blilly(_at_)erols(_dot_)com> writes:
Charles Lindsey wrote:
In <4159F9EC(_dot_)3020603(_at_)erols(_dot_)com> Bruce Lilly
<blilly(_at_)erols(_dot_)com> writes:
Charles Lindsey wrote:
The only place where it is known that a crosspost is occurring is at the
original sender.
Not true, on at least two counts:
1. an author might not know that a particular mailbox expands to a list.
Sure, the author might not know [...]
So you agree that your original statement was untrue.
OK, if you want to be unnecessarily pedantic:
The only place where it can be known that a crosspost is occurring is at
the
original sender.
No, Charles. You still have it wrong -- the author doesn't
necessarily know about all instances of list expansion.
But for sure if the author is not aware of it, then agents further
down the chain will be even less aware of it.
That's obviously wrong; clearly a downstream list expander (or
its maintainer) is aware that list expansion is taking place.
If a message is crossposted to List-A and List-B, then in general the
author will be aware of that fact. The message now goes to two
list-expanders, but the List-B expander is totally unaware that List-A is
another list, and therefore cannot modify its behaviour (e.g. in its
Reply-To or [...] So what is "obviusly wrong" about that?
1. The author may not know that address "foo" that he sent a
message to is expanded into a list. The list expander that
does the expansion does "know".
2. The mailbox associated with "List-B" is expanded into possibly
many mailboxes, some of which may be additional list mailboxes;
even if an author knows that "List-B" is a list, he may not know
that that mailboxes expanded from that list are further expanded
into additional lists.
Hence the original sender is that latest point
Still drawing bad conclusion from false premises, I see.
No, you don't see. Please explain how the expander of List-A or List-B is
is a better situation to deal with this scenario that the original sender.
See above.
Unless, of course, you have a better solution to propose.
And I am still awaiting your solution.
You still haven't said exactly what the problem is that requires
a solution.