bernie@metapro.DIALix.oz.au (Bernd Felsche) (06/16/91)
In <1991Jun14.153835.8709@cc.curtin.edu.au> chooper@cc.curtin.edu.au (Todd Hooper) writes: >Personally, I totally ignore the 'subject' header of bounced mail. In this >case, I would have ignored it as well. It is the job of academic staff to >uncover plagiarism - not mine. ... Indeed, many on the academic staff would be well experienced in (detecting) plagiarism. What is it that they say? "Copying from one source is plagiarism. Copying from three is _research_." >Most mailers have the 'headers-only' facility, when bouncing mail to the >postmaster. This should really be a default on mailers, since I can't think of >a single case where I have needed to look at the body of a message. Some mailing lists have non-obvious header lines, and often don't have To: lines. You then _have_ to peek at the top few lines of the message, to figure out who to send it to, or if to bounce it. In circumstances such as this, I can usually tell within the first 2 line of text, what list it is, and where to forward it. Despite my curiosity, I _always_ stop reading the mail if it gets *interesting*. >I can't see how you could be alerted to the contents by the subject - what sort >of student would be dumb enough to put a subject like 'Here is a copy of my >assignment...' ;-) Law students? :-) Establishing proof by precedent. -- Bernd Felsche, _--_|\ #include <std/disclaimer.h> Metapro Systems, / sold \ Fax: +61 9 472 3337 328 Albany Highway, \_.--._/ Phone: +61 9 362 9355 Victoria Park, Western Australia v Email: bernie@metapro.DIALix.oz.au