On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 11:01:26AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
Jacob Palme <jpalme(_at_)dsv(_dot_)su(_dot_)se> writes:
A related issue is if a message arrives in two copies, one with the
recipient as personal recipient, the other via a mailing list. When this
happens, the cause is almost always faulty handling by the sender's MUA,
and the intention is that the message should only be sent to/via the
list. So in this case, the best receiving MUA behaviour is probably to
completely suppress the personal copy of the message.
This is the way that I feel about it too, but as other people have
commented in this discussion, not everyone feels that way and some people
really want to get those personal copies.
All described above is easy to implement if the mailer keeps a data base
of message-ids and which messages they refer to.
It's not as easy as it sounds, since the message that should be
supppressed (in most of our opinions) is the personal copy, and that's the
copy that will almost certainly arrive first. You have to not show that
message to the user for some period of time while waiting for the list
copy to do this properly, which adds considerable complexity.
yes, I actually am mostly interested, for some lists, on messages that
are direct responses to me or followups on things I have written, - and
where it is likely that I am in noted in the cc-field. Most of the other
messages on the list may for some lists be considered a kind of noise.
Thus the direct mail is the most important for me in these cases,
and it should not be hidden or delayed.
So the desired behaviour differs, as also previously mentioned on this
list.
My new idea is that the preference could be noted by one or more headers
from the originator, and the responder and the mailing list exploder
could then behave accordingly. I think this has not been proposed before
here, but then I have not read all mail...
best regards
Keld