From: Michael O'Quinn <michael_at_oquinn.info>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 13:29:08 -0800 (PST)

Not really, but many email programs are. The more intelligent ones
recognize those SMTP headers, and present options to the user to do the
various actions the headers describe.

I don't know which email programs are that smart, but some are, and
that might help reduce some of the extraneous traffic.

Michael


On Mon, 27 Oct 2003, Jack wrote:

> Indeed, I was. Mail Headers are a really illogical place to put
> something like that. I wouldn't think of looking there. Am I stupid?
>
> =======================================
>
> On 27.10.2003 at 01:51 PM Chris Hoekstra wrote:
>
> >I am thinking he was not imagining smtp headers, but more of a
> >footer/header concept like what a word processor utilizes. So a header
> >would come before every message in his vision of what was proposed.
> >
> >In reality, we are talking of SMTP headers that are usually hidden by
> >the client unless one needs to see these advanced bits of information.
> >
> >Even though the decision has been cast, I do agree that a simple 1 or 2
> >line footer is FAR more effective for numpties/noobs than a potentially
> >hidden header that most noobs don't even know exist.
> >
> >Chris Hoekstra
> >
> >Chris Holt wrote:
> >
> >> I really dislike footers. How do you foresee headers being obstructive?
> >>
> >> On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 22:40:40 +0000, Jack wrote:
> >>
> >>>I agree that maybe an automatic footer (I think headers would be
> >>>obstructive) would be a good idea. Maybe just a link to the Mail List
> >>>home page, or even Rockbox's home page?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jack (My Website)
>
Received on 2003-10-27