A way to specify if a given cc'd correspondent should (or should not) receive the attachments
-- theircompetitor, Apr 29 2014

Vaguely related... _22_20Do_20you_20me...HIS_20Marc_3f_20_22
[normzone, Apr 30 2014]

I struggle to imagine a situation where I'd need to use this. Also I can see some potential problems:

•care would need to be taken not to refer to the attached document.
•if attached document was mentioned in the email, there would be confusion as to whether the document had actually been attached, or whether the cc recipient was deliberately excluded.
•there would also be confusion in mentioning the attachment when a recipient replied-to-all
•there would always be a suspicion that cc recipients had been excluded from receiving attachments (even if there weren't one in the first place)

Much simpler would be to send one email to all recipients sans attachment, then send another email to the select few with attachment.
-- xaviergisz, Apr 30 2014


needless complexity [+]
-- Voice, Apr 30 2014


I presume the purpose of this is to keep from clogging up the inboxes of people who only need to know that an attachment was sent, but don't actually need the attachment itself. The solution is to host your attachment with one of the many file hosting services and send a link instead of an actual attachment.
-- ytk, Apr 30 2014


Don't make any suspicion. Let the email header show the file names and maybe file sizes to everyone as well as who did and did not receive it. My manager really isn't interested in the data so why put a copy in his inbox. I'd recommend this as a NACC: (no attachment carbon copy). That way by default it works as it does today, but an email in the new NACC field doesn't get the attachment.
-- scad mientist, Apr 30 2014


Ok, this idea makes much more sense in light of ytk comment. I like his solution. An alternate solution would simply make the attachment deletable from the email by the recipient.
-- xaviergisz, Apr 30 2014


yes, [xaviergisz], [ytk] -- I've thought about this issue often -- as I'm one of these people that constantly sends lots of documents around -- and yes, links do offer a different solution to attachment issues, but it seems that this situation -- where someone is added to a thread, and etiquette requires them to continue to be cc'd, but absolutely does not require them to receive attachments, whether for security or interest or having previously seen them levels, comes up for me all the time :)
-- theircompetitor, Apr 30 2014


Why would you send someone an email with an attachment if you don't want them to receive the attachment? This ability already exists in the form of the attachment function itself.
-- tatterdemalion, Apr 30 2014


How about the server withholds the attachment from CC recipients, but provides an icon/link for them to click and download the attachment if wanted? But that probably already exists.
-- the porpoise, Apr 30 2014


Tatterdemillion, because you are replying to all on a message thread
-- theircompetitor, Apr 30 2014


Go ahead. Email me. I still will feel no attachment to you. At all.

Well, maybe if you have a clever .sig
-- sophocles, Apr 30 2014


// because you are replying to all on a message thread

If you're attaching something to your reply, don't reply to all (per my original question, why would you reply to all with an attachment if you don't want all of them to receive the attachment?).

Only reply with an attachment to the people you want to receive the attachment. If done properly, this will eliminate the possibility of persons receiving attachments whom you don't want to receive the attachments.
-- tatterdemalion, May 01 2014


[tatterdemalion], thanks for that illustrative tutorial on using email properly. Perhaps BCCs could also be implemented as separately forwarding the email to those who are not meant to be visible on the CC? That would have the added benefit of making sure they can't answer by accident?

Or maybe we can just use fax? No, better, interoffice mail? Remember those yellow envelopes?

This idea, of course, was to be able to complete the proposed task in both one email, and one step. If you don't quite understand why that's useful, you are likely not the use case this is addressing.
-- theircompetitor, May 01 2014



random, halfbakery