Re: Defining a group of addresses, sending mail to all , mutt

["Monique Y. Herman" <spam@bounceswoosh.org>]

On Wed, 24 Dec 2003 at 19:53 GMT, s. keeling penned:
> Incoming from Monique Y. Herman:
>> 
>> (If you're not sure if you want to hide recipients or not, you do.  I
>> can almost guarantee that at least one of your recipients will not
>> appreciate having their email address spread to other people without
> 
> This is especially true for all the nitwits relying on hiding,
> obfuscation, and munging email addresses in an attempt to minimize
> their spam load.  Chyaa, right.  That works.  :-P
> 

Not sure what you're getting at, but if you're trying to suggest that
I'm such a munger: my posting address is legit.

I was more thinking of cases like: Bob sends an email to all of his
friends using the To: field.  Maybe he sends this email to both Mary
and Joe, and maybe Mary has purposely neglected to give her new
email address to Joe.  Joe sees Mary's email address in Bob's list
and thinks, "Great!  I haven't talked to Mary in such a long time
..."

Or, say you're signed up to a sports league.  You get mass email
from the league officials, but don't want that jackhole who's always
in your face during games to easily have access to your email
address ....

Yes, it's obfuscation.  No, obfuscation will not block the
persistent individual.  But I'd still rather have people email the
group using BCC, not To.
-- 
monique