why does thunderbird need an outgoing SMTP account for newsgroups?

[Leviticoh]

as far as i know post are sent via the NNTP server, so it shouldn't need
to also send emails, but it keeps using my default email account to also
send an email to the person I'm replying to, even if such emails almost
never are delivered because everyone has addresses like "euwfhiu@dont-
email.me", is there a way to disable it?

[Leviticoh]

nevermind, solved, I was using "reply" instead of "followup"

[Marco Moock]

If you want to reply to the author instead of the newsgroup, you need
SMTP.
The mail address of the author will be used from From: or from
Reply-To: if set.
@dont-email.me is being used in the Message-ID. The reply won't go
there, it is only an identifier of the message.

Please only reply to the author directly if there is a reason (e.g.
personal discussion due to privacy etc.).
Follow-Up means posting to the group.

--
Gruß
Marco

Spam und Werbung bitte an ichschic...@cartoonies.org

[Adam H. Kerman]

Marco Moock <mm+s...@dorfdsl.de> wrote:
>Am 09.02.2024 19:48 Uhr schrieb Leviticoh:

>>as far as i know post are sent via the NNTP server, so it shouldn't
>>need to also send emails, but it keeps using my default email account
>>to also send an email to the person I'm replying to, even if such
>>emails almost never are delivered because everyone has addresses like
>>"euwfhiu@dont- email.me", is there a way to disable it?

I see from your other post that you have begun using the followup
rather than the reply command in Thunderbird so that you post in
followup to Usenet and don't send a reply in email.

>If you want to reply to the author instead of the newsgroup, you need
>SMTP.
>The mail address of the author will be used from From: or from
>Reply-To: if set.

And of course this is dangerous. I've seen plenty of posters who put
invalid mailboxes or nonsense on Reply-To. It's beyond stupid if From
has already been munged to add Reply-To in circumstance in which reply
is email is unwanted.

>@dont-email.me is being used in the Message-ID. The reply won't go
>there, it is only an identifier of the message.

Ray Banana registered the domain once *.me became an allowable top-level
hierarchy. He had long been using that to create the Message-ID for
users who weren't supplying a Message-ID in the newsreader.

>. . .

[Daniel65]

Leviticoh wrote on 10/2/24 6:43 am:

> nevermind, solved, I was using "reply" instead of "followup"

Interesting that you type that .... cause I use SeaMonkey Internet Suite
(think Firefox plus Thunderbird plus) and I just clicked the 'Reply'
button to compose this reply!!
--
Daniel

[Marco Moock]

FF/TB and SM are very different these days.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Yeah, well, that was never good design.

We've long used the terms reply in email and followup in News. It's an
email message and a Usenet article.

Seamonkey went another way. If the user is replying or following up, it
needs to be absolutely clear to him which medium of communication he is
about to use.

[Don Vito Martinelli]

Seamonkey has (looks) three buttons. Reply, Reply All, Forward.
In this context,
Reply - goes to the Newsgroup (plural if cross-posting is in effect)
Reply All - goes to the Newsgroup(s) and the sender, both are clearly
marked.
Forward - wherever you want it to go.

[Adam H. Kerman]

Yes, I've been told this. "Reply All" is an email concept, replying to
all receipients of the precursor message in email OR reply to the
mailing list posting address in lieu of the author. There's never been
any consistency in implementing this command.

What it's not is a command from jargon we use with Usenet.

I'm a long-time alpine/pine user. I used pine right when it first became
a News client. It always used email terminology. Oh well.

[immibis]

On 10/02/24 19:03, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Daniel65 <dani...@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>> Leviticoh wrote on 10/2/24 6:43 am:
>
>>> nevermind, solved, I was using "reply" instead of "followup"
>
>> Interesting that you type that .... cause I use SeaMonkey Internet Suite
>> (think Firefox plus Thunderbird plus) and I just clicked the 'Reply'
>> button to compose this reply!!
>
> Yeah, well, that was never good design.
>
> We've long used the terms reply in email and followup in News. It's an
> email message and a Usenet article.

The fact that bad design was used 40 years ago does not justify still
using bad design. This is a post, which replies to your post. Otherwise,
do you speak Old English?

[Adam H. Kerman]

It's not a reply. It's a followup. Followup is the term we use on
Usenet. When you have a client for both Mail and News, it's necessary to
make it absolutely clear to the user sending a reply or followup which
medium of communication he is about to use. From Daniel's and others
description of Seamonkey, it uses certain terms ambigiously, which is a
failure of design.

I just wrote that. Can you read?

[Daniel65]

Marco Moock wrote on 10/2/24 10:42 pm:

> Am 10.02.2024 21:51 Uhr schrieb Daniel65:
>> Leviticoh wrote on 10/2/24 6:43 am:
>>> nevermind, solved, I was using "reply" instead of "followup"
>>
>> Interesting that you type that .... cause I use SeaMonkey Internet
>> Suite (think Firefox plus Thunderbird plus) and I just clicked the
>> 'Reply' button to compose this reply!!
>
> FF/TB and SM are very different these days.
>

You could be correct, Marco, but I don't recall ever having to click on
"followup" even way back in Netscape Suite .... but I could be wrong! ;-)
--
Daniel