Post by John Ashby Post by J. P. Gilliver (John)
Post by Sam Plusnet
I imagine that there are many many people 'out there' who have no
idea what "carbon copy" and "blind copy" mean.
Those terms make sense if you ever worked in an office where memos
were typed on typewriters with layers of interleaved carbon paper.
That was a long time ago and only a subset of the population ever
became familiar with it.
Interesting point. (There's also the question of what the difference
between "To:" and "Cc:" is; I have a vague memory that there _is_ [or
maybe _was_] some arcane technical difference, but in practice their
_technical_ effect is identical, and it's only interpretation that differs.)
The difference comes in the action of Reply vs Reply All.
Good point; I suppose that _is_ a technical rather than an
interpretational difference; it doesn't affect how the original is
propagated, but since the difference is universally recognised by mail
softwares, it does indeed affect replies.
Hang on though, no, it doesn't: a "Reply" will always go to the sender,
and a "Reply all" to all, whether the person replying is the original
"To:" person or one of the "Cc:"s. (Or even the "Bcc:"s.)
I'm still curious how Bcc: relates to the carbon-paper office, though (:
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)***@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
There are a lot of things that children should be shielded from, but
"bad language" isn't one of them.
"Honey, we shouldn't say that when other people are around because some
grownups get upset about it. No, I don't know why, they just do."
- "The Real Bev", in mozilla.general 2015-6-7