Subj : NNTP and To: field
To   : Digital Man
From : Accession
Date : Thu Nov 06 2025 04:40 pm

Hey Digital!

On Wed, 05 Nov 2025 18:03:00 -0800, you wrote:

>> I think what he was saying, is that even when there /is/ a recipient
>> (doesn't just about every 'reply' message have a recipient?), it
>> still uses "All" (and I don't disagree that is indeed how NNTP has
>> always worked).

> No, not all USENET replies have a recipient.

Correct, however /this/ (as in what I'm fairly certain we're discussing) isn't USENET. We're using NNTP to access our message bases (which may or may not actually carry USENET). I think this conversation was much more pointing towards BBS/FTN messages. Most local and FTN messages (particularly replies) on a BBS usually have a recipient (do they not?), unless it's specifically sent to "All".

> X-Comment-to is not a requirement or universally used.

You're right. However, in the hobby we are involved in, it makes the normal "To" and "From" fields look like everyone elses that aren't using NNTP. I also wasn't stating that Synchronet needed to do that, I was just mentioning that's how I got around all of my messages posted with a newsreader being addressed to "All".

What (I think?) the question from the OP was, was asking why /all/ messages are addressed to "All" when it seems like there's something already in the code that is looking for a recipient it could be filling the "To" field with on a reply?

Regards,
Nick

... Sarcasm: because beating people up is illegal.
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20250409
* Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (723:1/1)
￭ Synchronet ￭ _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin)

You are viewing proxied material from cvs.synchro.net. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.