Subject: Re: Reply vs. Forward (was: Re: three unrelated issues. (fwd)

From: daniel lance herrick <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 13:37:58 -0400 (EDT)

I was just wrong.

the forward below was done after turning on
viewing of full headers and saying don't hide it
in an attachment.

When I didn't turn on the viewing of full headers,
the quoted message did not include the
Received: headers or a few others.

Reminds me of Socrates declaring that, obviously,
women have fewer teeth than women. (Without, of
course, asking Mrs. Socrates to open her mouth.)

dan

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 12:00:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Beartooth <[email-masked]>
Sender: [email-masked]
Reply-To: KHLsv <[email-masked]>
To: daniel lance herrick <[email-masked]>
cc: Pine Discussion Forum <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Reply vs. Forward (was: Re: three unrelated issues.

On Fri, 13 Sep 2002, daniel lance herrick wrote:

> Reply prunes a lot of headers.
>
> Forward preserves a lot of headers.
>
> I don't believe the state of the full headers
> toggle has any effect on what headers get
> preserved in either case.
	(snipperoo)
	If that last is true, I've been going to a lot of wasted
trouble for a lot of years!

	Suppose it is; A forwards message XKQJ to B, without
turning on full headers; what does B do to see the full headers
that A got?
-- 
Beartooth the Stubborn <karhunhammas (at) lserv.com>
Linux hatchling w/ RH, YDL, & OSX; Pine 4.43; Pan 0.11.2;
Privoxy 3.0.0, Opera 6.03, Galeon 1.2.5, Mozilla 1.0
Delenda est MegaSleazo! http://www.linuxmall.com/refund/

---

From: Beartooth <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 14:03:05 -0400 (EDT)

> course, asking Mrs. Socrates to open her mouth.)

	Hey, it happens to every one of us occasionally; meanwhile,
we're all more sure of what really happens. And thanks for
checking! I was too frenetically busy to do the self-forwards and
other effort it must've taken you.