Chas wrote:
>...but ALL of the messages simply say that they are from ".
>I have no clue or idea who the author or sender is on any single >message unless they actually sign their message, as you did...
Just my 2 cents worth...
I get individual messages, and they ALL come to me with the "from field" filed in the form of:
"SplitPersonality <amphicarlovers@amphicar770.com>"
or
"chasgould <amphicarlovers@amphicar770.com>"
... etc.
and my opinion is that is just fine. It makes it just a little difficult to harvest the email address and figure out a real face for the poster, but many times you still recognize who posted that even without a signature in the text. i.e. If I go to the amphicar770 website, use the member tab and look up "chasgould" (from the email address "from field") I see what that person entered for their "real name". If I do the same with "SplitPersonality" I can find out other information but not the real name as that person chooses to remain a little more anonymous. I can guess knowing that Victor likes woodies ( ... that may get filtered by some spam protocols ...) and lives between Daytona and Orlando, etc. If all people had the real name field filled in, then it would be just a simple redirection to figure it out, but then again, some might want to remain more obscure. I think that is a personal choice as to how much information to divulge. It is also just 1 click to view all posts by that person and thus form opinions... For example, tazman doesn't put his real name in the profile, but a simple 1 click finds some posts one can easily see messages where Chuck divulged that information indirectly.
Bottom line, I think it is fine the way it is.
Signed,
unsigned but recognizable <G>
