[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Note: was *to* CNN, cc to lynx-dev: ...

From: Al Gilman
Subject: Re: Note: was *to* CNN, cc to lynx-dev: ...
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 16:52:36 -0500

At 02:50 PM 2002-11-28, Clemens Fischer wrote:
David Combs <address@hidden>:

> I sent also to lynx-dev, just so you'd know
> that CNN was yet another javascript-baddie.

too bad (sigh)!  i support your email to CNN, though, this is
important and neccessary.

> Except that I didn't do it via cc, but by a 2nd
> item on the to-line.  Sorry -- made me look
> like an idiot (which I maybe was, for doing
> it that way! :-)

this i don't understand.  in what sense are two addresses on the To
line not equivalent to one on the To and one on the Cc?

Maybe this is a North American office practice peculiarity.

If there is any action to be taken, someone on the To: addressees list is
supposed to do that.  The recipients on the Cc: list are getting this
communication for information, not for action.  As understood by the
From: party.

But this is a nicety of correspondence protocol, like changing the
Subject: line when the thread has left the original topic, that is
mostly honored in the breach.  A minority of people carefully read and
edit their email headers.  But they get more mileage out of the messages
they send.

On the other hand if you really need your recipients to know these things,
this is an argument for an address through salutation block containing
such information in the RFC-822 body of the email.



; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden

; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]