Re: References in forwarded messages

Nathan Stratton Treadway wrote in
 <[email protected]>:
 |On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 10:26:30AM +0100, Ian Collier via Mutt-dev wrote:
 |> is no clear reason why the References header should not be used.  On the
 |> other hand, this doesn't benefit the recipient, because they don't have
 |> the original message (or you wouldn't have needed to forward it).
 |
 |(For what it's worth, I'm not sure "doesn't benefit the recipient" is so
 |clear-cut:
 |
 |The References header often references multiple messages [going back
 |further in the thread than the specific one being forwarded], and the
 |forwarded message might have more than one recipient [including via a
 |mailing list].
 |
 |So it's seems like there will be many situations where where at least
 |some of the recipients do have at least some of the referenced messages
 |already in their mailbox -- and having the forwarded message tie
 |into the existing thread could be useful to those recipients.)

btw i for one would only place one message-id in references:, what
would land in in-reply-to.  The MUA i maintain has
a *forward-add-cc* flag

       (Boolean) Whether senders of messages forwarded via the COMMAND
       ESCAPES† ˜F†, ˜f†, ˜m†, ˜U† and ˜u† shall be added to ‘Cc:’.

because i mean that uh-oh-maybe-exaggerated touches personal
rights.  Ie, very often one is asked for messaged being forwarded
elsewhere, and then simply including message-ids of people that
were not asked is .. what is it?
Anyhow for a great threader like mutt it seems to me a single ID
is enough, it surely is placed near where Alejandro wants to see
it.  (This is not true for this one here, the "first level is not
joined", with a many-year-todo to fix that.)

Just my one cent.

--steffen
|
|Der Kragenbaer,                The moon bear,
|der holt sich munter           he cheerfully and one by one
|einen nach dem anderen runter  wa.ks himself off
|(By Robert Gernhardt)