Which is often glossed over . . .

Crystal's mention of the etymological roots of CC (as carbon copy), followed by the phrase "which is often glossed over as courtesy copy" really stuck with me. When the archaeologists review my mother's office, they will find the artifact "carbon paper," the predecessor to "carbonless copy paper," and something that has no need in a world without type writers or high demand for handwritten forms. Teachers scoff at the warnings to use a ballpoint pen when completing Individualized Education Plans "in triplicate" because now they are 1) typed, 2) printed and 3) photocopied.

And as much as we try to gloss over the roots of the CC and BCC lines in our email headers, we are still very much stuck in the tenets of formal letter writing. When an email header identifies the date, the sender and the recipient, why are we so concerned with greetings and salutations? Are these stylistic artifacts harder to gloss over?