Re: Kind reminder: please don't reply to and/or quote spam, ever
On 2020-04-19, <tomas@tuxteam.de> <tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:
>
>> My half-assed understanding of bouncing is this: When you get a
>> message that wasn't really meant for you, and you know where it ought
>> to go, then you should "bounce" it there [...]
>
> Correct. This was bounce's original purpose. It has the property
> that it passes the original mail's headers on, and thus its
> utility for some secondary purposes:
>
We had a thread a while back with Reco and Jon Dowland about the bounce
feature; alpine has it, Kmail has it, Thunderbird needs an add-on, and
Mutt, the email client of the stars, of course, has had bounce since
Methuselah was in diapers.
At any rate, as bounce means more currently, IMVHO, a notice from an email
system to the sender of an email that said email is undeliverable, using
the term for a redirection seems fraught with the danger of
misconstrual. But I guess these are dangerous times, n'est-ce pas?
Reply to: