On 27.05.15 16:59, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * Matthias Apitz <g...@unixarea.de> [05-27-15 16:51]:
> > My point is: if the sender to a list wants only receive mails from the
> > list and not to his account too, IMHO the sender (or the list) should
> > take care on this and not blame the person just using group-reply;
>
> Understood. I see further discussion is w/o merit. You are not
> responsible for *your* actions, everyone else is. Major problem with the
> world as it is today!
Patrick, grumpiness does creep up on one with age - but the world is
spared it as we, one after the other, roll off the end of the conveyor.
Then our old standards are forgotten.
In the interim, I find that it is easiest to allow technology to present
the world in a more acceptable fashion when compatibility issues arise.
You're doubtless aware of the simple procmail ruleset:
# Collapse duplicate messages, but not
:0 Whc: msgid.lock # my posts that I've BCCed, for testing.
* !^From: Erik Christiansen
| formail -D 8192 msgid.cache
# And save duplicates, in case of recipe
:0 a: # flaws below. (man procmailex)
duplicates
OK, if the list post arrives after the "courtesy reply", then the damn
thing arrives in the default mailbox rather than the mailing list
mailbox, but it's not hard to manually save it there. If there were ever
to be many of them, I'd let procmail look in Cc: as well as List-Post:
headers, then I'd never know that a "personal" copy had also been sent.
Those who can need to make allowances for those who don't yet know how,
or have inferior tools. (Perhaps not every phone runs mutt?)
In any event, Insistence is futile!
Erik
--
When water availability drops below 1500 cubic meters per person per year, a
country needs to start importing food, particularly water intense crops.
Saudi Arabia faces this problem. Twenty other countries fell below this
threshold in 2000, and another 14 will join them by 2030.
- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/business/7790711.stm
