Is it any convient way or macro to send a bunch of emails
to a list or recepients without letting them know each other?
Of course, I can leave out To: field and put them all in BCC(to
get filtered) or use mutt from bash script, but it is not too
convient.
--
Best regards, Dmitry Bogatov ,
On 2013–03–01 Dmitry Bogatov wrote:
Sorry, I don't have an answer, but an additional question.
> Is it any convient way or macro to send a bunch of emails
> to a list or recepients without letting them know each other?
>
> Of course, I can leave out To: field and put them all in BCC(to
> get fi
* Will Fiveash [2013-03-01 00:14]:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 05:03:23PM -0600, Will Fiveash wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 03:35:44PM -0500, David Haguenauer wrote:
* Stefan Wimmer , 2013-02-28 12:55:39 Thu:
I recently started to sign all my mails and it took me little time
to find out that you
* Dmitry Bogatov [03-01-13 07:06]:
> Is it any convient way or macro to send a bunch of emails
> to a list or recepients without letting them know each other?
>
> Of course, I can leave out To: field and put them all in BCC(to
> get filtered) or use mutt from bash script, but it is not too
> con
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:24:44PM -0600, Will Fiveash wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 12:55:39PM +0100, Stefan Wimmer wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I recently started to sign all my mails and it took me little time to find
> > out that you can't delete attachments in signed/encrypted mails ... ;-)
On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 04:04:26PM +0400, Dmitry Bogatov wrote:
> Is it any convient way or macro to send a bunch of emails
> to a list or recepients without letting them know each other?
>
> Of course, I can leave out To: field and put them all in BCC(to
> get filtered)
Lack of the recipient in
On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 12:09:28PM -0500, Mark H. Wood wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 01:24:44PM -0600, Will Fiveash wrote:
> > - Why sign most messages? Unless the information is important for
> > others to verify that it came from a particular person why add the
> > bloat of a signature.
Will Fiveash wrote:
> The why is that you are adding needless bloat to most messages you send.
One person's "needless bloat" is another's digital signature, I guess.
> Take for example the message you sent that I'm responding to. Does
> anyone care that it actually came from you and wasn't tampe
