John Buttery <john@io.com> wrote:

"Lie" is kinda an interesting way to put it, but I think we all know what he means. How can you say that readdressing a mail (which is what you're doing here) isn't a "lie" the way he's referring to it? It's in plain black and white.

Sure it is. You assuming a certain set of semantic connotations for the To: and Cc: headers and then inferentially assume that everybody else operates on the same understanding of those headers. The problem is that its just not true. Your assumptions are neither universal or necessarily shared.

Well, OK then, how would you differentiate this new behaviour from a hypothetical message I might have sent pre-upgrade that _did_ have your address in the To: and the list in the CC:?

One has a List-ID header, one doesn't.

One has an In-Reply-To that references my prior post, one doesn't.

(Of course, I acknowledge that sending a copy directly to a person who is already subscribed to the list is a bit silly/redundant, but I don't see that that dilutes the point at all. In five seconds I can think of a case where this would happen...I see a mail off the list, I don't know someone is subscribed, so I send them my followup but also CC the list because I think it pertains there also. With this new function, you've just erased anybody's ability to tell the difference between those two situations.)

Ignoring the aspects of etiquette in quoting a private email in a public forum, this is also not a problem for the same reasons as above.

John Buttery <john@io.com> wrote:

"Lie" is kinda an interesting way to put it, but I think we all know what he means. How can you say that readdressing a mail (which is what you're doing here) isn't a "lie" the way he's referring to it? It's in plain black and white.

Sure it is. You assuming a certain set of semantic connotations for the To: and Cc: headers and then inferentially assume that everybody else operates on the same understanding of those headers. The problem is that its just not true. Your assumptions are neither universal or necessarily shared.

Well, OK then, how would you differentiate this new behaviour from a hypothetical message I might have sent pre-upgrade that _did_ have your address in the To: and the list in the CC:?

One has a List-ID header, one doesn't.

One has an In-Reply-To that references my prior post, one doesn't.

(Of course, I acknowledge that sending a copy directly to a person who is already subscribed to the list is a bit silly/redundant, but I don't see that that dilutes the point at all. In five seconds I can think of a case where this would happen...I see a mail off the list, I don't know someone is subscribed, so I send them my followup but also CC the list because I think it pertains there also. With this new function, you've just erased anybody's ability to tell the difference between those two situations.)

Ignoring the aspects of etiquette in quoting a private email in a public forum, this is also not a problem for the same reasons as above.