I <am pretty okay with> the new mail system

[jim stephens]

On 3/3/2017 11:38 PM, Christian Corti via cctalk wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Mar 2017, Jules Richardson wrote:
>> Thanks to both of you. I came back to cctalk after not checking it 
>> for a few days, and wondered what the %$#^ was going on, with every 
>> message showing with cctalk as the "from" field.
>
> I'm another one who dislikes the new system. It would be much better 
> if the Reply-To field did *not* contain the sender's email address 
> because when I reply to a message, I use the Reply-To field (of 
> course) and have to delete the extra line because I want to reply to 
> the list and *not* privately to the sender. So either the sender's 
> address should be in the
>> From field or in a new header field, e.g. List-Original-Sender or 
> something like that.
> For now I have set up a procmail rule to strip the "via cctalk" from the
>> From field because this is ugly and redundant.
>
> Christian
Thunderbird is putting in the list with the person in the Reply-To being 
an additional recipient in the To:

I have not bothered stripping that extra.

The via ctalk is useful as a target for filtering the traffic.  For some 
reason there is leakage of detected emails on google. It is perhaps due 
to prior mentioned non conforming emails of some sort, don't know, their 
filtering sucks.

But it may be that that will allow me to catch more if not all of the 
cctalk traffic in gmail.

I'm subscribed three times for archival purposes.  I read via an email 
subscription that ends up in a Thunderbird file via pop3 from that 
server.  Never misses with the email rule.

I wanted an outside the building forget it archive I could peruse, so 
created a subscription into my gmail account.  That one is leaking about 
1 to 5 messages a week using the same rule as Thunderbird, which is 
based on email to / from etc.

And a third subscription goes to an account on a server which pulls 
everything via fetchmail.  That subscription has nothing but Cctalk on 
it.  i have it as my main archive if all else fails. (and Thunderbird is 
getting flaky, and has failed).

If the via cctalk stays, I'll try looking for that.  I had asked jay 
eons ago about a [cctalk] prepend on the subject and his and others 
opinions was that that was not desirable.  However it always works on 
all lists I have for filtering.  Maybe putting it in the from will be 
unobtrusive enough people will put up with it, and maybe Google's 
filtering won't suck with a rule hitting that field.

thanks
jim