From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Sep 10 17:36:18 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA07039 for freebsd-chat-outgoing; Thu, 10 Sep 1998 17:36:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from pobox.com (rafft-41.mdm.mkt.execpc.com [169.207.84.169]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id RAA07006 for ; Thu, 10 Sep 1998 17:36:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from hamilton@pobox.com) Message-Id: <199809110036.RAA07006@hub.freebsd.org> Received: (qmail 5870 invoked from network); 10 Sep 1998 19:40:16 -0500 Received: from localhost (HELO pobox.com) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 10 Sep 1998 19:40:16 -0500 To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Making A FreeBSD CD-ROM In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 10 Sep 1998 17:29:08 PDT." <18976.905473748@time.cdrom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 19:40:16 -0500 From: Jon Hamilton Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In message <18976.905473748@time.cdrom.com>, "Jordan K. Hubbard" wrote: } > } Then why did you leave -questions in the cc line? :-) } > } > So that anyone reading it in -questions who cared could follow it to -chat. } } Use bcc for this - doing it the way you did it only ensures that } everyone else will just continue to blindly reply-all and you'll have } essentially achieved nothing save a slight reshuffling of the } header. :-) Hmmm, I did put in a Reply-To: line, but I suppose using a bcc: would have been better. -- Jon Hamilton hamilton@pobox.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message