Last time I tried it (months ago), I was not able to send to any CC or BCC recipient...Ray mentioned it was likely an issue of my ISP. I have been working around this by using programming to send a seperate email to the other recipients, seperately. It's been working fine, though not as convenient.

I'll be eager to see what you come up with.

Steve

Hello Spencer,

When you have a second I need you to test something. Using SendMail, Send an e-mail to yourself and BCC it to my address. Just ONE e-mail.

I can CC and BCC a message from @SendMail(). One thing I have noticed is that the BCC has to be someone that does not resolve to the Sender. So if I use my e-mail address as the sender I can not BCC myself.

-Ray

Hello Spencer,

Use Support@Lantica.com

-Ray

So,

That answers one question.  The BCC absolutely DOES work when it is sent to an address other than the one from which it came (which of course is the way it would "generally" be used).

So, now ....

Is this something that is "fixable" within Sesame ... or is this something "inherent" in the ISP?

If the former, then fix it (lol)

If the latter, any ideas for a "work-around."  Again, the bottom line is that I would like to receive a copy of the emails I send to someone, without them seeing it on the e-mail.

While waiting to hear the answers, I'll be stretching my brain ... to see if I can come up with my own idea.

Thanks Ray.

Oh, one last question, I wonder whether I should (or should not) remove Ray from the BCC programming for all my emails.  ROFLOL!   Relax, I'll remove it; I'll remove it!

Hi -

Quote:


I would definitely prefer this to sending a second e-mail so I'll work on it and let you know how I make out.

And, regarding the BCC to Ray

Quote:


DONE!!!   

Thanks, again.

Ray -

I am sorry that I have to get back to this matter, but after putting a lot of energy into getting to the source of the BCC "problem," I am more convinced than ever that "something" is being affected by the Sesame design itself.

I have contacted technical support for both my ISP (Road Runner) and my E-mail provider (Incredimail) and all the tests we made show no problem with a BCC.

Yet when I make the same test from my Sesame database, the BCC fails.

First let me give you some background.  My personal E-mail account is

SWulwick@tampabay.rr.com

I have another account for my business E-mail which is

Spencer@SilversOlutionS.org

When E-mail is sent to my business account, two things happen:

1)  The sender of the E-mail receives an acknowlegement (from my business account) that the E-mail was received and that I would reply to them as soon as possible.

2)  The incoming business E-mail is forwarded to my personal road-runner account.

When USING INCREDIMAIL, it is sent as follows:

From:  SWulwick@tampabay.rr.com
To:      Swulwick@tampabay.rr.com
CC:      (None entered)
BCC:    Spencer@SilversOlutionS.org

Sure enough, I get 3 pieces of E-mail (1) The E-mail addressed to me (2) the "acknowledgement" from SilversOlutionS that my E-mail was received and (3) the E-mail BCC'd to SilversOlutionS and forwarded to me.  

That's as it should be.  As far as I'm concerned this should be "proof positive" that neither my ISP nor my E-mail provider is prohibiting the sending of a BCC, when I'm the recipient of the BCC.

YET, when I execute my E-mail from within my SESAME DATABASE to do the same thing, the BCC fails.  I get only the original E-mail.  I do not get an acknowledgement from SilversOlutionS that any message has been received nor do I get the forwarded copy from SilversOlutionS.

That leaves only TWO VARIABLES (as far as I can tell) and BOTH of these variables are WITHIN SESAME.  The two variables are (1) the database design itself and (2) the coding that I use to implement @sendmail.

As for the latter (my coding) I have checked it dozens of times and it seems to me that I have it done correctly.  In fact when you had me modify my programming to send you the BCC, it woked just fine.  That tells me that my coding is correct (although here is the code once again, in case I am overlooking something).

var ii as Int  


ii = [color=Maroon]@SendMail("SMTP-SERVER.TAMPABAY.RR.COM", vsubject, "swulwick@tampabay.rr.com",EmailAddress,"","Spencer@SilversOlutionS.org"[/color], "Hi " + First Name + ", " + @newline()
+ @newline() + vlastemail + @newline() +@newline() + "Spencer Wulwick" +@newline() + "Silver sOlutionS of Tampa, Inc." + @newline() +  "www.SilversOlutionS.org")

If ii = "0"
then


@Msg(" ****************************** YOUR E-MAIL IS BEING PROCESSED ****************************** ")
LastEMail = ("The following e-mail was sent to " + First Name + " " + Last Name + " on "
+ @month$(@date) + " " + @dom(@date) + ", " + @year(@date) + " at " + @time + @newline() + @newline()  
+ "Hi " + First Name + ", " + @newline () + @newline() + vlastEMail + @newline() + @newline() + "Spencer Wulwick" +@newline() + "Silver sOlutionS of Tampa, Inc." +@newline() + "www.SilversOlutionS.org")
Subject = vsubject
 

If there IS a problem with my coding, then I need help, because I just can't see it.  

If there is NOT a problem with my coding, then, as far as I can tell, that leaves only one variable, and that variable is within the design of Sesame.

Knowing that neither the ISP nor the E-mail provider has anything to do with the problem, I would really appreciate it if the design could be explored further.

Apparently, I am not the only person who has had this problem.  Others have said they circumvented it by sending the E-mail to a text file and by other means.  

Steve, in Texas, said:
Quote:


It would be a great service to those of us using this feature if it could be resolved once and for all.

Thanks much!

Mark,

I just added a cc to one of my other accounts (SpencerWulwick@myfamily.com).  It, too, receives e-mails independently and then forwards a copy to me at SWulwick@tampabay.rr.com.

The only e-mail I got was the one I sent TO myself.

I checked the myfamily.com website and there was no email there.

Mark -

As I said, even adding a cc before the bcc did not work for me. 

Before I even continue testing it, are you saying that in order to use the programming statement to include a BCC you MUST include a CC? 

As I said earlier, I don't want a CC to show.  If I MUST use the CC then it negates any value of the BCC - at least for me - and at least in the manner in which I am currently trying to use it.

Thanks!

Well, then I am still left with my earlier question.

Since everything works the way I want sending it from my e-mail provider,

with no intererence from them or my ISP, then what is the cause of the problem?

Mark -

I have to tell you honestly, that I feel like I am hitting my head against a wall.

Agreed that I don't know the nuances of all the programming involved in the various components of this issue.

But I do know logic.

If the SMTP is interfering with my sending a BCC then why does it work without any problem when I send the e-mail from my e-mail server.  If it is the SMTP causing the problem then I would think it would affect any e-mail I tried to send from any source.

It is only when I try to send it from within Sesame that it doesn't work.

I just tried it again from my e-mail program I sent it TO myself with the CC field EMPTY and a BCC to Spencer@SilversOlutions.org.  (aka SOS),  I received the TO email, the notice from SilversOlutionS.org that an e-mail was received and the forwarded e-mail (sent as a BCC to SOS) forwarded to me at road runner (by SOS).

Again, if the SMTP were the "fault" then how could I do this?

Once again, I am allowing for the fact that there is much I don't know ... but so far, none of the responses given me have provided a logical solution other than to point at something going on within Sesame itself.

Mark -

Quote:


Quote:


Aha, maybe that's the clue.

I don't have any idea what an RCPT is but it really doesn't matter.

If MY "dedicated email program" may not be sending the empty RCPT ... and it is perfectly legal ... and it WORKS

then why can't you fix Sesame to not send the empty RCPT and have it work, too, the way at least several of us want it to and the way it would be expected from the @sendmail command?

Since it sounds like that is a "variable" or "distinction" between my e-mail server (which works) and @sendmail (which doesn't work - and I'm only referring to the BCC issue - the rest of it works like a charm) then I would think it is well worth your giving  it a shot.  

That might just be the solution we are looking for.  

Mark -

Again, I'm baffled. 

Why can't you just TRY it?

Or play with a copy of the programm as you do with your "hot fixes" and I'll be glad to try it.

It seems to me that's one way to find out which works better; the way it is currently set up or using one of the other options available.

Mark -

Quote:


MEA CULPA!!!

I found something I was overlooking when modifiying my mass update programming.  In case anyone's interested, I'll be glad to explain it (after I get some sleep).

I'll also share the 7 tests (with minor variations between them) that I made.

But the bottom line is that I was wrong about one point ... and that might just prove helpful.  When I add a CC before the BCC, it is properly executed.

I receive 3 copies (To, CC, BCC) (along with the notification that comes from SOS to acknowledge receipt of the mail).

So ... that being the case, I would very much appreciate it, if I would be able to try the programming WITHOUT sending the "blank" value for the CC (I believe you referred to it as an RCPT).

I cannot help but feel that there MUST be a solution for this and I'll do everything I can to help uncover it.  "People" created computers, so "people" ought to be able to make them perform any way we want.

And, by the way, you said that you tried it ... but you didn't say what the outcome was.   Did it, by any chance,  succeed?

Mark -

I appreciate all the feeback you gave me; however, much of it is over my head (and truthfully, I don't mind if it stays there).  lol 

Except for one point:

Quote:


and in an earlier message:

Quote:


So, I'm hoping that since we now know it IS the same problem there is a point to pursuing this direction.

Again from everything I've read - and a couple of additional tests I made this morning, I still think there must be a solution, that would work on your two servers, and mine, and perhaps most others and "yes", perhaps not, but we won't know if it isn't tried. 

In any event, I made a couple of additional tests just now that are also revealing.

I sent an email with a "bogus" (but valid format, i.e. Mail@Sesame.com) cc address.  I received two E-mails, one for the "To" address and the other for the "BCC" address.  The one with the "CC" Address was returned to me as "undeliverable."

I then sent an e-mail with two dots in the CC Address.  I received 2 E-mails, one for the "To" Address and the other for the "BCC" address.  And, once again, the one with the "CC" address was returned to me as "undeliverable."

Erika -

That sounds wonderful.  Certainly, I realize that all aspects have to be considered and that they are rapidly changing especially with regard to E-mail.  Again, all I'm asking for is what I consider "reasonable" consideration and then if indeed, something can't be done ... well, it just can't be done.

I would never expect anyone to modify a program to work for me - that  might or might not work for others.  In this particular case, though, it seems that the BCC is not working (without using the CC) for anyone and that Mark has a way of making in work in at least his two trials and probably for me as well.  That being the case, it might also work for "Steve in Texas" and who knows who else.  At the very least, it will at least be something better than we now have. 

Now for some "really good" news, for me at least.  I just retrieved the records (in a working database), of 11 of my friends.  I typed the body of my e-mail once and clicked on my "Send All" command button.  (The E-mail I sent, asked people to "forward" it back to me, so I could verify receipt and structure).  I received a copy (BCC having used a "bogus" CC) of each of the 11 E-mails.

Although I just did this a short time ago, I have already received two of the E-mails forwarded back to me.  Each was properly - and personally addressed - and structured precisely as I wanted.   I now have a fully-functional mass e-mail process in place ..... without having to enter even one single e-mail address.  Yippee!!!

I will, of course, be glad to share what I came up with, with anyone who is interested.

Erika -

You said:

Quote:


But Mark had said in an earlier response:

Quote:


So, when Mark said he tried it, and it worked in two instances, I thought he was referring to something other than including a CC.   If I misinterpreted his response, my apologies.

I do want to make one thing very clear here, that I have also said before on more than one occasion, because I don't want to get into any misunderstanding.

1)  I think Sesasme is a  phenominal software product.  (Otherwise, I wouldn't be dedicating my time, energy and effort to working with it).

2)  I think each and every one of you have been providing  phenominal support, that goes far beyond what any other Software Development company has ever provided their customers.  Presently, no-one comes even close.

3)  I think the "turn-around" time for receiving responses is absolutely phenominal.  (I have never complained about how long it took to receive a reply and doubt that I ever will).

4) I absolutely applaud each and every one of you for the job you have done and the job you are doing.

5) I flaunt Sesame to anyone and everyone who will listen.

And, yes, on rare occasion there may be a difference of opinion but certainly, nothing that is irreconcilable.  That's what makes us human.  Certainly, when there is a difference I would just like to reconcile it and move on from there.

Once again, thank you for the time, energy and effort you (and Mark and Ray and, perhaps others "behind the scenes") put into responding and clarifying each and every issue.

And one last thing that perhaps I don't say often enough - although I try to - Thank you, most sincerely!