Reply to All: A lesson in e-manners for my Bush-hating cousin

Opinion Journal ^ | 01/22/04 | ALAN BROMLEY

[Pokey78]

My cousin, whom I'll call "Bob," just included me in a group e-mail that implied President Bush was anti-Semitic because he hadn't appointed a Jew to his cabinet. The e-mail, which went out to some 50 people in my cousin's address book, said that every president in the past hundred years or so had indeed selected at least one Jew to be in his cabinet.

[cd jones]

Oh man, does this ever hit 'home'. Been there done that.

[APFel]

You were a lot kinder to "bob" than I would have been, relative or not.

APf

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

Using the "Bcc" Field
When the email addresses have been entered in the address book, your list is ready to use. But you'll want to send messages to the list without disclosing any of the recipients' addresses. So if you haven't already been introduced to the "Bcc" field, it's time to get acquainted.

When you open a "New Message" window in your email software, the message form will usually include a header that looks something like this:

---

To:
From:
Subject:
Cc:
Bcc:
X-Attachments

---

(Note: In some email software, "Bcc" is not included in the default setting of the header display. If you don't see it, check the "Help" file or the User Manual that came with the software, or contact the software company's support service by phone or email.)

Using the Media list in the example above, here is how you can send a message without revealing the reporters' email addresses: Type "Media" in the "Bcc" field of the message header (instead of in the "To" field) and type your own email address in the "To" field. When the reporters receive the message, it will appear to have been sent from and received by you, and will look something like this:

[Seattle]

Your basic problem is that Cousin Bob is somewhat of a twit when it comes to email. I've had similar things happen when liberal friends send me stupid email..... If they're dumb enough to publish their friends' email addresses, I'll gladly supply 'em all with a dose of the truth.

When you want to send a message to a list of people, put their email address in the "bcc" field. BCC is blind carbon copy. Nobody sees the email addresses there. Just put one person's address (even your own) in the "To:" field the rest in the bcc field and send the email.

Everyone gets the eamil and no one sees the email addresses.

[NonValueAdded]

I'd be upset at the original sender for including my address in a big mailing list. If the first sender bcc'ed the addresses, no one would see anyone else's address and a "reply all" simply goes back to the first sender.

[spectre]

Dear Bob:

You shotgunned a smarmy e-mail attacking something you didn't like about President Bush.

I shotgunned a reply back disagreeing with you.

You replied with some smarmy twit comment about some kind of etiquette.

Pi** up a rope.

Regards:

[Richard Kimball]

If this is all it takes to crank his wagger he wouldn't last a week on FR.

[merry10]

So it was okay for Bob to send out email slamming Bush, but not okay for you to defend him? If you're guilty of spamming then so is he.

[AppauledAtAppeasementConservat]

"Proper e-mail etiquette does not include the use of other people's personal address books to further one's political, personal objectives, or opinions, and is very offensive."

Funny, isn't that what he was doing to you?

[Keith in Iowa]

To all who have someone like that in their lives...tell them to click this:

http://www.smilepop.com/index.cfm?action=viewcard&content_id=8407&page_id=8407

[Dolphy]

Proper e-mail etiquette does not include the use of other people's personal address books to further one's political, personal objectives, or opinions, and is very offensive. Especially when all their opinions and objectives are totally wrong and inconsistent with public sentiment!!...

Well no wonder Cousin Bob doesn't know what public sentiment actually is given his desire to control all information that goes in and out of his circle of friends. No offense to the family, but he seems like a jerk. I'd him to delete my name from his address book and stop spamming you.

[skr]

Defending the truth is not spam to my way of thinking.

As to the etiquette question, the subject matter and who is in the group determines to whom I reply.

[fini]

Assuming you sent your email to the same group he sent his to, it sounds like Bob wants it both ways (unless he considers his original email spam). He wants to send opinion to people he knows, but doesn't want anyone in that group to pass a different message to the same group. I am a LtCol in the Marine Corps and we hit "reply to all" regularly. In fact, opinion seems to get passed around more than details. Some really good replies get sent. No one gets upset. But of course we're a pretty thick skinned group.

[AppauledAtAppeasementConservat]

"And finally, a note to my cousin: Sorry "Bob," I didn't mean to offend you, but you've known me long enough to know that I rarely keep my views to myself. Hope the wife and kids are well."

I dunno but sounds like you just gave this guy permission to bully you in the future. I personally would have just appologized in another email to those explaining my intent was to respond to 'Bob' only.

[bjcintennessee]

Sound familiar? - LOL

[woofie]

One needs to remind BoB that Nixon hired Kissinger and hugged Sammy Davis Jr. and that didnt keep the left from hating him...maybe the left is anti-Semitic

[Tall_Texan]

I have no problem at all with what this guy did to reply.

It was his way of saying "if you insist on shoving your politics down the throats of others, allow me to defend the family name by offering them a fair-and-balanced rebuttal."

Generally, the problem is that liberals don't want to debate you - they want to browbeat you. They aren't interested in the discussion, just in hurling the accusations.

FWIW, most cabinets have had far more Jews than their percentage of the population would justify (not that there's anything wrong with that, just pointing out how hollow this particular complaint is), further there are certainly Jews in high levels of the Bush White House whether they are technically members of the Cabinet or not.

Finally, if you accept the liberal dogma that all Jews/blacks/Hispanics are *supposed* to be Democrats then it seems hypocritical that they would complain that not enough of them are in a Republican cabinet. When Bush names blacks to his cabinet, the blacks are dismissed as "Uncle Toms" and "House Negroes". Or, in one instance they complain that a Hispanic isn't "Hispanic enough" because he's also a Republican. It would seem to me then that if any Jews *were* in Bush's cabinet, the liberals would have to dismiss them as not being "Jew enough".

You just can't win with them. That's why they won't argue because you normally need to peel away two or less layers of their logic before you reveal its rank hypocrisy.

[Texas Mom]

That's why, when I send out an email I usually clean up all the addresses ( if it was a forward) and the ones I send are sent BCC.. The person who sent the email to you shouldn't have sent you his address book with his email if he didn't want you to respond to all.. I guess maybe he should learn a lesson in email etiquette before he starts accusing you.
When you send out Christmas cards via snail mail, do you include your whole Christmas card mailing list?

[Texas Mom]

BTW.. It was a great reply to your cousin...