Just a small tiny point. The email address is used to deliver the mail. So really you are asking the impossible and making it sound like some security issue exposing the intended recipient. Perhaps a paper analogy will work to explain. Take a piece of paper and write john smith on it attach a postage stamp and post it. What are the odds it goes exactly nowhere as it has no address. It is exactly that same with email. The email address is the digital address the mail is being sent to. Without it the server can do nothing about organizing delivery.

When we send an email the To: may contain a "display name" component in the form such as shown in this address below.

Mozilla Support Forum <[email protected]>

The first part "Mozilla Support Forum" is a display name and may, or may not be displayed to the recipient, depending on the mail software in use. Some may display just that. Thunderbird for instance. Other specifically ensure they get the entire To: field displayed. Some mail clients actually supress disalay if anything but the address.

What is certain however is the display name serves no purpose than to be easier for people to navigate. The email address that follows is the part that is actually used by the mail server to send the message on it's way. For instance the sending server actually queries the domain name service (DNS) used throughout the internet for the address of the server after the @ part of the email address. This is largely the same process that occurs if you type google.com in the address bar of your browser. A call is made to DNS for a machine readable address.

Once the address of the server is known, the sending server attempts to connect to that server to deliver the mail addressed to the part before the @ and after the < in the address field. If the server has such an account then it will usually accept delivery of the mail. If such an address is not located on that server, then the connection will be refused, as will delivery.

Some servers will accept delivery for non existent addresses as rejecting confirms they exist or not. But that in no way says the receiving server actually does more than drop it into a bitbucket of unwanted data if the address does not exist. Others will forward miss addressed mail to a collection address and let a human decide what is to be done. Usually marketing web sites that do not want to miss a lead and consider the process to be cost effective.

Matt, Sarcasm ("just a small tiny point") is unnecessary. Perhaps you meant to be helpful. I take it that Thunderbird's address book has no setting (preference, switch, option, whatever) equivalent to Outlook's "Display as" setting? That's all I'm after here. Clearly, checking "show only display name" has no effect.

I used Thunderbird for years, then used Outlook for a while. I have been disappointed in Thunderbird since returning to it, in this and in the default setting of chronological order in folders, which apparently must be changed folder by folder. Mary

You might also find this really strange, but I have no idea about Outlook. I do not use it, have not used it more than very casually when helping my wife for more than a decade. I still find it hard to use and making hard work of what should be easy things, but that is why I left about 20 years ago. Microsoft invented their ribbon and that was the last version of Office I used as well. I wanted nothing to do with menus and toolbars that rearranged themselves. So in my ignorant perspective please re read what you wrote. You asked to send mails without an email address, and that is what I answered. It is a tenny point, but they are required, despite what some folk think.

This option you talk about? No idea what it is, what it does or how it functions. So I googled it. This is what I found. https://www.thetraininglady.com/customise-display-name/

So I guess you just don't want to see the email address, even though it is used when you compose mail. Well I am sorry, but I am not aware of any way to make Thunderbird hide the email address being used entirely. The use address book display name is used in mail display and lists, but not in compose. It makes sending to the wrong address just so simple.

Personally I would be turning that off if it did exist. How do I know if I am emailing my wife at work or at home or at one of here other less monitored addresses, unless I can see the address I am using.

I agree the sort order is a pain, But then I do not really make many new folders, and find clicking the date column heading a fairly minor task. I find scrolling the list back to where I was after the sort more an issue when the folder has tens of thousands of mail in the list.

However, you appear to be asking for change. Not seeking support. I would suggest you make some suggestions on the UX mailing list for your preferences. https://thunderbird.topicbox.com/groups/ux

I think many of the ideas being discussed there are poor. But I am also apparently in a minority of one on many.

Matt, I'm in publishing and therefore chained to MS Office, including Outlook and especially Word. Been using Word since 2003 and still curse it regularly. WordPerfect was far superior for anyone in publishing or law (I'm in both). I don't agree about what I asked; you misread it. But never mind. Outlook has the option of using the Display Name (name only) or the name + email address, in composing/addressing, for any entry in the address book. You'd be able to tell addresses apart with no trouble. This is not to say you should even try Outlook; it's clunky at best and subject to newly infuriating and senseless glitches. I do use a lot of folders, none of which has thousands of emails in it; I use subfolders. The inability to set reverse chronological order as default is a pain in the neck. So the "use address book display name is used in mail display and lists, but not in compose" ? That's all I needed to know. I will take a look at https://thunderbird.topicbox.com/groups/ux. Mary

The 'Display Name' is really useful when it comes to what gets displayed in the 'FROM' or 'Correpondents' column header in Thread Pane/Message List and also in a received email header as it simplifies the view. It uses less space in what is a more confined area. These are the main areas that are designed to benefit from the 'Display Name' option.

In the 'Write window - The email address is always displayed because some people have more than one email address and if it is not displayed then you would not know if you are using the correct email address. For example: It would be embarrassing to the recipient to receive private email in a business email address. Hence why Thunderbird always displays it and it is a requirement for sending anyway.

Toad-Hall, Thank you for taking the time to reply. The fact is that a small addition to the addressee's name can solve what some see as the problem of multiple addresses that cannot be told apart by display name. Using "Bea Smith-home," for example, would add a marker designating which address has been selected to the Display Name. It would not be necessary to display the whole email address, which is, in fact, a security issue for some people I know. Mary

Stepping in briefly, I admire the nature of the discussion; I could learn from this. As an aside, there has been no mention of the original poster's concern on sort order. Am I amiss or does this address her concern in config editor? If not, then it's good for me to know as well:

Preference Name Status Type Value mailnews.default_news_sort_order: default integer x mailnews.default_news_sort_type: default integer y mailnews.default_sort_order: default integer x mailnews.default_sort_type: default integer y

In the above, replace the x and y of the value by double-clicking the name of the preference and replacing it with one of the following values as required:

SORT

==

1 = Ascending 2 = Descending

TYPE

==

17 = None 18 = Date 19 = Subject 20 = Author 21 = ID (Order Received) 22 = Thread 23 = Priority 24 = Status 25 = Size 26 = Flagged 27 = Unread 28 = Recipient 29 = Location 30 = Label 31 = Junk Status 32 = Attachments 33 = Account 34 = Custom 35 = Received

David, I think maybe you misposted. I had and have no concern about sort order. Please check. Mary

My error, Mary. I saw some words about your frustration with folders not in reverse chronological order caused me to make that inference. My regrets for interfering. david