I'm having trouble seeing significant benefits. What problem would
this proposal solve? The justifications in the draft seem to me to
be a little ... esoteric. I really wonder if defining new header
fields and MTA behaviors is justified.
it's a valid question.
The primary desire is to reduce the number of messages some
recipients receive.
not only to reduce network bandwidth consumption and the number
of messages in those people's inboxes, but (more broadly) to
make email a more effective tool for discussions with more than
two participants. the more people who appear to be involved
in a conversation, the harder it is to get closure.
The situations given seem mostly to be about informing some folks
that the discussion is going to continue amongst other folks, and
that the folks of the first part needn't worry their pretty heads
about the matter anymore.
This could be accomplished by simply forwarding a copy of the reply
to the folks who need to be informed.
True. Though by a similar argument, we don't need the ability to
have multiple recipients in the To or Cc fields either. In fact,
authors find it useful to be able to send only a single message,
and recipients find it useful to know who else has received the
same message.
I'd need to be made to understand many more benefits to this proposal
before I'd consider adding support for it. I'd be surprised if other
MUA authors didn't feel the same way.
it's a reasonable request, and I'll work on coming up with more
justification for the next revision.
thanks,
Keith