From: Benjamin Franz (snowhare@nihongo.org)
Date: Wed Sep 27 2000 - 14:09:48 CDT
On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, John Stanley wrote:
>
> A followup agent MUST NOT (unless its user explicitly overrides it)
> email a copy of the followup article to the author of the original
> article if the Mail-Copies-To header contains the "nobody" keyword.
> If the user explicitly overrides this provision, the followup agent
> MUST/SHOULD/Ought to issue a warning to the user and ask for
> confirmation.
>
> No! The poster has specifically stated that email replies are not wanted.
> The recipient of the email has the right to control his own mailbox, it is
> not the sender's right to override the explicit instructions of the
> poster.
>
> The followup agent MUST NOT email .... Period.
Pointless. A user can *ALWAYS* cut-and-paste their way around any
attempted enforcement mechanism for this. It doesn't affect
interoperability in any way. There is no way to defend a 'MUST NOT' in the
spec as an interoperatibily issue.
If you don't want email being generated from your Usenet postings - that
is what '.invalid' addresses are for.
-- Benjamin FranzPerl - A post-modern programming language or a scripting tool gone horribly, horribly wrong? -- Rob Malda