> > As to my experience (with procmail filtering), it is unreliable to > > expect that the send-msg-to-list address appears in To: or Cc:. > > so this list distributes messages when the list is in the BCC header? > well, blame the list admin then!
Yes, and I won't waste time on politics, which is what complainig to list owners boils down to. Besides, I actually find bcc: mailinglist useful, to avoid private addresses in to: appearing on the list. Extremely useful actually. > depending on your MDA you can still filter on the Delivered-To line. > but that's a local problem which you can probably solve yourself. Yes, procmail handles all that easily. The trickier bit is finding out which headers are indeed forcefully inserted by the list handler, and which are simply commonly used I (besides keeping up-to-date with it). But that's not to do with mutt. > and i almost never see the "clutter" as my shell's globbing > allows to leave them out in a very simple way: > > ls *(^@) Too much typing. > PS: Volker - you do not seem to attribute quoted text. > that is bad. especially on mailing lists. Personal opinion. I find it a waste of bandwidth. We're dealing with issues, not individuals. The real sender can easily be found a few msgs back. At least people trim their replies on this list... Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann, list0570 at paradise dot net dot nz http://volker.orcon.net.nz/ Please do not CC list postings to me.
