On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 03:00:32PM +0200, lee wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 09:51:03AM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> > * lee [07-03-10 09:13]:
> > > On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 12:12:38AM +0200, Rado S wrote:
> > >
> > > > Practice has shown that it is not best practice.
> > >
> > > Because of
=- lee wrote on Sat 3.Jul'10 at 15:12:49 +0200 -=
> > Wasted effort compared to an editor macro to add some line like
> > "please acknowledge receipt and respond ASAP".
>
> What makes you think that the recipient would bother to write an
> answer?
What's so much harder for the recipient to hit
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 09:51:03AM -0400, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
> * lee [07-03-10 09:13]:
> > On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 12:12:38AM +0200, Rado S wrote:
> >
> > > Practice has shown that it is not best practice.
> >
> > Because of poor support, maybe :)
>
> Or, more likely, requests for features
rror messages
sent to them ...
In this case, the alternative would be to print the message on paper
to deliver it in person and have them certify that they recieved it. I
like return reciepts better for now.
> >> Practice has shown that it is not best practice.
> >
> > Becaus
On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 12:33:22PM +0200, Simon Ruderich wrote:
>On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 03:12:49PM +0200, lee wrote:
>
>But if the recipient doesn't care about your mail, then how does
>adding a receipt request help?
>
>>> Practice has shown that it is not best practice.
>>
>> Because of poor supp
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 03:12:49PM +0200, lee wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Let me add that you just got me to the idea that a simple yes/no for a
> combination of recipients won't suffice: It would have to be
> always/once/no/never, meaning that for the combination of recipients
> in question, the requestin
* lee [07-03-10 09:13]:
> On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 12:12:38AM +0200, Rado S wrote:
>
> > Practice has shown that it is not best practice.
>
> Because of poor support, maybe :)
Or, more likely, requests for features that most do *not* want presented
in a haughty manner which would require coding
On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 12:12:38AM +0200, Rado S wrote:
>
> Your original request just sounds like reversing the default from
> "mostly no r-r, with manual exceptions" to "mosty _DO_ r-r, with
> manual exceptions", it actually requires you still to make a manual
> choice...
That is not at all wha
Сбт, 03 Июл 2010, Rado S писал(а):
> Wasted effort compared to an editor macro to add some line like
> "please acknowledge receipt and respond ASAP".
> If you just want to reverse the default, add such line to your
> $signature, and delete it when not desired.
IMO the key to get response is polite
Ok, some more bashing... ;)
=- lee wrote on Fri 2.Jul'10 at 16:39:53 +0200 -=
> > > Noone using return reciepts?
> >
> > No, because if you want that, just write it in your eMail.
>
> That's awfully annoying and too easy to forget.
No, automatic retur
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 04:36:18PM +, Grant Edwards wrote:
>On 2010-07-02, rog...@sdf.org wrote:
>> But to step aside from paranoia, it could be considered a "politeness
>> feature" as
>> it would tell a friend or significant other that you did receive their email.
>
>That's what the "r" key
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 07:40:45PM +0100, Toby Cubitt wrote:
>
> in discoursing from the armchair without actually trying to implement it,
> there are very quite likely difficulties I'm missing here.
See, it's not all that easy :) So before spending a lot of time to
figure it out, I thought it a g
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 06:23:23PM +, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2010-07-02, lee wrote:
>
> > Having that said, it comes to mind that more users of mutt might make
> > use of return reciepts if there was well designed support for them
>
> Doubit it. Well designed s
escribed in my OP with a little scripting,
> > that's great for you, but I don't see how to do it. I'd have to write
> > a program in C for it and somehow make it work with mutt --- and
> > preferably make it so that it can be used with other MUAs as well. I
> > do
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 07:13:02PM +0200, lee wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 05:15:36PM +0100, Toby Cubitt wrote:
>
> > the Disposition-Notification-To: header. So to request receipts, it may
> > be sufficient to add this header to your outgoing emails using mutt's
> > my_hdr command.
>
> That
On 2010-07-02, lee wrote:
> Having that said, it comes to mind that more users of mutt might make
> use of return reciepts if there was well designed support for them
Doubit it. Well designed support for evil is still evil.
1/2 :)
> ... One way to address privacy concerns coul
t and somehow make it work with mutt --- and
> preferably make it so that it can be used with other MUAs as well. I
> don't know of any MUA that deals with return reciepts in the way
> described in my OP.
So, what you *really* want is for someone to code/script it for you.
Th
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 12:11:27PM -0500, David Champion wrote:
> * On 28 Jun 2010, lee wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > how do you handle return reciepts with mutt? I know I can add header
>
> You could try Werner Koch's rfc2298 MDN patch, but afaik it has not been
>
's great for you, but I don't see how to do it. I'd have to write
a program in C for it and somehow make it work with mutt --- and
preferably make it so that it can be used with other MUAs as well. I
don't know of any MUA that deals with return reciepts in the way
described in m
* On 28 Jun 2010, lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> how do you handle return reciepts with mutt? I know I can add header
> lines to request a reciept (with my_hdr), but how do I make it so that
> reciepts are requested based on, for example, recipients?
You could try Werner Koch's rf
On 2010-07-02, rog...@sdf.org wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 04:39:53PM +0200, lee wrote:
>>On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 11:09:22PM +0200, Rado S wrote:
>> ... snip ...
>>Besides, it's hard to believe that noone on this mailing list has use
>>for return reciepts a
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 04:39:53PM +0200, lee wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 11:09:22PM +0200, Rado S wrote:
> > =- lee wrote on Thu 1.Jul'10 at 18:08:43 +0200 -=
> >
> > > Noone using return reciepts?
> >
> > No, because if you want that, just wr
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 04:39:53PM +0200, lee wrote:
>On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 11:09:22PM +0200, Rado S wrote:
> ... snip ...
>Besides, it's hard to believe that noone on this mailing list has use
>for return reciepts and/or that everyone handles them manually.
Return receipt
On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 11:09:22PM +0200, Rado S wrote:
> =- lee wrote on Thu 1.Jul'10 at 18:08:43 +0200 -=
>
> > Noone using return reciepts?
>
> No, because if you want that, just write it in your eMail.
That's awfully annoying and too easy to forget. It's
On Thu, Jul 01, 2010 at 06:08:43PM +0200, lee wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 10:21:31PM +0200, lee wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > how do you handle return reciepts with mutt? I know I can add header
> > lines to request a reciept (with my_hdr), but how do I make it so that
Чтв, 01 Июл 2010, lee писал(а):
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 10:21:31PM +0200, lee wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > how do you handle return reciepts with mutt? I know I can add header
> > lines to request a reciept (with my_hdr), but how do I make it so that
> > reciepts ar
On 2010-07-01, lee wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 10:21:31PM +0200, lee wrote:
>> how do you handle return reciepts with mutt? I know I can add header
>> lines to request a reciept (with my_hdr), but how do I make it so that
>> reciepts are requested based on, fo
=- lee wrote on Thu 1.Jul'10 at 18:08:43 +0200 -=
> Noone using return reciepts?
No, because if you want that, just write it in your eMail.
--
© Rado S. -- You must provide YOUR effort for your goal!
EVERY effort counts: at least to show your attitude.
You're responsible for AL
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 10:21:31PM +0200, lee wrote:
> Hi,
>
> how do you handle return reciepts with mutt? I know I can add header
> lines to request a reciept (with my_hdr), but how do I make it so that
> reciepts are requested based on, for example, recipients?
>
> The i
Hi,
how do you handle return reciepts with mutt? I know I can add header
lines to request a reciept (with my_hdr), but how do I make it so that
reciepts are requested based on, for example, recipients?
The idea is something like mutt asking me if I want to request a
reciept when sending a
On 1999-11-17 19:59:24 +0100, Jan Houtsma wrote:
> Well in netscape you have the choice either a confirmation if the
> mail has been delivered (so thats the MTA) but the other is that
> the mail actually has been read. In winblows u always get a popup
> window in that case where u can say yes or
On Wed, Nov 17, 1999 at 06:56:40PM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> On 1999-11-17 12:44:25 -0500, Subba Rao wrote:
>
> > I have a question about return receipts. Are return receipts
> > handled at the client level or by the MTA?
>
> They are handled by the MTA.
>
> > If at the client level, in t
On 1999-11-17 12:44:25 -0500, Subba Rao wrote:
> I have a question about return receipts. Are return receipts
> handled at the client level or by the MTA?
They are handled by the MTA.
> If at the client level, in this case mutt, how can I return receipt
> for only address? One of my friends, se
I have a question about return receipts. Are return receipts handled at the
client level or by the MTA?
If at the client level, in this case mutt, how can I return receipt for only
address? One of my friends, sends email with a return receipt request. I would
like to return receipt only for his
++ 17/11/99 18:56 +0100 - Thomas Roessler:
>However, you may just add a small autoresponse function to your
>~/.procmailrc. Make sure you make this robust against mail loops!
...by adding a special field to the header by yourself and check for
that field whenever the autoresponder is invoked. So
35 matches
Mail list logo
