Re: User-Agent: and In-Reply-To:

In message <ZCJhkDGyWKRSWFzc@int21h>, void writes:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 04:04:31PM +0200, Peter wrote:
>
> >list, as most people on the list tend to Cc: to the personal mail
> >address anyway, 
>
> I've never understood the practice of Cc: on a list both parties are
> implicitly subscribed to. 

Because some of us use procmail, slocal, or other rule processors. Emails 
sent to the mailing list go into a folder. Emails which have any of my 
email addresses in the to or cc line will also end up in my inbox folder. I 
look at inbox before I look at anything else. Emails to or cc me will 
always get my attention. Emails destined to the mailing list will 
eventually be read but, depending on workload, $JOB, life, etc., maybe not 
today.

Also a to: or cc: to any of my email addresses will also be sent to my 
phone in case I'm AFK for a while, also making sure those emails get my 
immediate attention.

I wouldn't doubt others may implement the same policy using procmail or 
even Outlook (which has powerful processing rules).

So, yeah, to and cc while also cc the ML does have its place.

Regarding replies, MUAs that don't fill in references will break threading. 
As an MH user my MUA has been configured to specifically add fill in the 
references header to make sure the ML will thread properly. Not all MUAs do 
this and it's annoying.


-- 
Cheers,
Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>
FreeBSD UNIX:  <cy@FreeBSD.org>   Web:  https://FreeBSD.org
NTP:           <cy@nwtime.org>    Web:  https://nwtime.org

			e^(i*pi)+1=0