Can Distribution List Sent Show Only One Recipient in Emails Recei

[arnie582]

This is a re-write of a previous post, that didn’t get resolved. I’m
restating it here to get a fresh start / better response. Also, please note
that I’m not very technically savvy, so if there is a solve for this, please
advise me in very plain language. Thanks in advance.

Scenario: I'm a new user of Outlook 2007. Say I have a large group of
clients. I want to create a boilerplate email for, that goes out to all the
recipients. However, I want each email sent to be received by a single
client, and at the same time not have that client be aware of the other
clients (It’s a confidentiality issue). In the previous responses to my
similar question, I was told to put the addresses in the Bcc: section. That
didn’t work, as all the email addresses show up in the recipients email.
Restated, how do I accomplish sending out a one mass email, that get received
by only each recipient, without referencing (anywhere in the email) the other
recipients?

 

[Russ Valentine]

The answer you received was correct. Your claim is not. No recipient can
ever see anything you place in the BCC field.
Another way to accomplish this would be to use a mail merge to electronic
mail. You can read about mail merges in the Help Files and several online
sites such as:
http://www.gmayor.com/mailmerge_from_outlook.htm

 

[arnie582]

In the interest of clarity for this thread, I wanted to explain further what
happened in my test of the first advice I received. And thanks, for your
suggested reference on merges. When I went to test the Bcc:ing I sent an
email to myself w/ 2 Bcc:'s. When I opened my email, of course, the 2 Bcc:'s
showed up, which defeated my purpose of confidentiality (thinking that would
happen w/ all recipients). I figured out that the original suggestion was to
put addresses in the Bcc: section only, which wasn't stated clearly. Your
saying that "your claim is not correct" isn't helpful. I think, the fact that
I'm new to this discussion group and new to Outlook, plus my clear indication
that I'm a novice, should be sufficient for your not making a statement like
that, which basically is another way of saying I'm not being truthful.
Fortunately, I'm not that sensitive. Mainly, I want to say this to you
because that type of remark discourages others from posting, in my view. I
find the sight very useful and would like it to be equally useful for other.
Anyway, please take this as a suggestion on how to remark to others.

As a final remark, I think your response should have read "No recipient can
ever see anything you place in the BCC field, EXCEPT WHEN THE RECIPIENT IS
YOURSELF." I think that would be a correct statement.

 

[Russ Valentine]

Might want to take a moment to learn how newsgroups work, then.
You posted no information that would permit anyone to guess how or why you
arrived at the wrong conclusion. Nor was that germane to your question.
What was important is that you receive a prompt and clear statement of fact
that the conclusion you drew was wrong, not only for your benefit but more
importantly for others reading the thread who might be misled by your
statement.
That's what you got. That's what you should expect to get from volunteers
who answer your questions on their own free time. We don't have the time to
guess what you don't tell us. Equating telling you you drew the wrong
conclusion with accusing you of being dishonest mystifies me. If your
feelings get hurt that easily, you might want to consider using paid support
instead of newsgroups. They have lots of time there and are paid to walk you
through things step by step.