Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!pacbell.com!pacbell!premenos!mtdiablo!rob
From: rob@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US (Rob Bernardo)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.elm
Subject: Re: "bounce" vs "forward"
Message-ID: <1991Apr22.142212.23250@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US>
Date: 22 Apr 91 14:22:12 GMT
References: <3092@sparko.gwu.edu>
Distribution: na
Organization: Mt. Diablo Software Solutions
Lines: 26

wilhite@seas.gwu.edu () wrote:
>At our office, we have one person (a point-man, of sorts) who sifts
>through the root mailbox and "bounces" messages to the appropriate
>recipients.  The hitch is that the "bounce" function leaves no clues
>in the header telling who the message was originally from, so unless
>there's a signature on the note, it's often hard to know who to reply
>to.

Don't you have this backwards? The bounce command leaves little trace
of who the *bouncer* is, and makes it appear that the letter was sent
by the original author. Btw, the top From line(s) (not the header From: )
should indicate who the bouncer is, although this info is not normally
displayed by elm when paging through messages.

>Was it intentional that the "bounce" command eliminate all header info
>referring to the original author (i.e., to make it appear that the
>"bouncer" is the original author)?  If not, would it be difficult to
>have the "bounce" code create a "Reply-To:" or "X-Author:" in the header?

The purpose of the bounce command is to send on a message to an appropriate
recipient as if the original author addressed it directly to that person.
So when the final recipient gets it and, say, does a reply, the reply is
to the original author, not the intervening bouncer. 
-- 
Rob Bernardo					Mt. Diablo Software Solutions
email: rob@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US		phone: (415) 827-4301