Subject: Difference between LCC and BCC?

From: Michael Pollak <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 23:44:25 -0400

I've been sending lists using BCC for a long time now, and it works just
fine -- so long as I put something in the to line (an appropriate alias
with my address), every one the mail, but not the list of addresses.

Does the new "lcc:" improve on this procedure in any way?  All comments
appreciated.

Michael
__________________________________________________________________________
Michael Pollak................New York [email-masked]

---

From: Edward M Greshko <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 3 May 1997 19:12:22 +0800 (GMT)

> Does the new "lcc:" improve on this procedure in any way?  All comments

	It turns a 2 step process into a 1 step process?

-- 
Edward M. Greshko                  Technical Manager, Electronic Commerce
                                   Control Data Asia/Pacific Region
Voice: +886-2-715-2222 x287        6/F, 131 Nanking East Road, Section 3
FAX  : +886-2-712-9197             Taipei, Taiwan R.O.C

---

From: Abhay Roy <[email-masked]>
Date: 11 May 1997 00:05:49 GMT

I use it all the time. I think it just puts the list name on the To line.
So what everyone sees is in fact a non-reply'able expression. I strongly
support LCC option.

Harry Slaughter <[email-masked]> wrote:

: I think you should continue as you are. I tried using lcc, which is
: supposed to fill out the "To" line for you, and it put the first
: address on the mail list on the to line and confused all recipients. I
: never figured out how to fix this. Now I mail to myself and include
: everyone on the bcc line.

: On Thu, 1 May 1997, Michael Pollak wrote:

: > 
: > I've been sending lists using BCC for a long time now, and it works just
: > fine -- so long as I put something in the to line (an appropriate alias
: > with my address), every one the mail, but not the list of addresses.
: > 
: > Does the new "lcc:" improve on this procedure in any way?  All comments
: > appreciated.
: > 
: > Michael
: > __________________________________________________________________________
: > Michael Pollak................New York [email-masked]