🚀 go-pugleaf

>      The X mail system (is this part of X windows?) seems to indulge in
> heavy self-promotion.  Is all the following, taken from incoming mail,
> necessary?  It has little value to the recipient.

The "X-" stuff has nothing to do with a "X mail system"; RFC822
specifies that non-standard headers should begin with an "X-" to avoid
conflict with any future defined headers.  The following are from a
variety of mail systems:

> 	X-To:         DYNSYS-L%UNCVM1.bitnet@jade.berkeley.edu
From a bitnet gateway at berkeley (UREP)
> 	X-Mailer: Elm [version 1.5b]
> 	X-Mailer: Elm [version 1.5d]
From two different versions of Elm.
> 	X-Origin: The Portal System (TM)
> 	X-Possible-Reply-Path: Ed_Eric_Mitchell@cup.portal.com
> 	X-Possible-Reply-Path: sun!portal!cup.portal.com!Ed_Eric_Mitchell
From "portal", trying to let the recipient know possibile reply
addresses, since addresses passing through uucp land are likely to
become unrecognizable.
> 	X-St-Vmsmail-To: MIPL3::ST%"jbn@glacier.stanford.edu",RGD059      
> 	X-St-Vmsmail-To: ST%"jbn@glacier.STANFORD.EDU",RGD059      
> 	X-St-Vmsmail-To: ST%"jbn@glacier.stanford.edu"
One VMS mail system showing what addresses the VMS user sent mail to,
before they were converted to "normal" addresses.
> 	X-Vms-To: IN%"jbn@glacier.STANFORD.EDU"
The same, from another VMS mail system.
-- 
John Owens		john@jetson.UPMA.MD.US
SMART HOUSE L.P.	uunet!jetson!john		(old uucp)
+1 301 249 6000		john%jetson.uucp@uunet.uu.net	(old internet)