Hi Ken, > > ISTM that MH's authors took a wrong turn, given their implementation > > of bcc and their reluctance to add dcc. This pushed them towards > > removing the recipients from a group address. Having a "normal" > > bcc, or dcc early on, would have given that second place to put the > > recipients when an empty group is wanted for privacy. > > I see your point and I can't disagree with it, but my feeling is that > ship sailed approximately 30 years ago; IMHO changing the behavior now > gets us very little and breaks things for existing users.
Agreed. > I'm also in the camp that think's MH's bcc behavior is confusing, and > don't understand John Romine's dislike of dcc. My guess at both is they didn't like the blind accidentally replying, embarrassingly giving away their eavesdropping. Cheers, Ralph. _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list Nmh-workers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
