From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 23 21:00:54 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A56F9106564A for ; Sat, 23 Apr 2011 21:00:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from perryh@pluto.rain.com) Received: from agora.rdrop.com (agora.rdrop.com [IPv6:2607:f678:1010::34]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81E598FC18 for ; Sat, 23 Apr 2011 21:00:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from agora.rdrop.com (66@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by agora.rdrop.com (8.13.1/8.12.7) with ESMTP id p3NL0rS7099252 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 23 Apr 2011 14:00:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from perryh@pluto.rain.com) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by agora.rdrop.com (8.13.1/8.12.9/Submit) with UUCP id p3NL0rmJ099251; Sat, 23 Apr 2011 14:00:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fbsd61 by pluto.rain.com (4.1/SMI-4.1-pluto-M2060407) id AA14525; Sat, 23 Apr 11 13:49:09 PDT Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2011 13:48:03 -0700 From: perryh@pluto.rain.com To: smithi@nimnet.asn.au Message-Id: <4db33b03.bF5oQ49fa/W3k+mi%perryh@pluto.rain.com> References: <20110422120038.633AB10657D3@hub.freebsd.org> <20110423153335.H43371@sola.nimnet.asn.au> In-Reply-To: <20110423153335.H43371@sola.nimnet.asn.au> User-Agent: nail 11.25 7/29/05 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How to be an imap Client? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2011 21:00:54 -0000 Ian Smith wrote: > Apologies for assuming you must have cc'd Jerry. I should have > checked your original post in freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 359, > Issue 4, which shows any ccs, but not headers such as Reply-To: > per message .. That wasn't aimed at you, Ian, but at Jerry's threat to report something as spam without checking his facts. Absent the threat I would simply have told him that he was wrong. Your assumption was entirely reasonable (and couldn't have been disproved via the digest or archives anyway, since those would not show the Bcc: recipients had there been any).