It would appear that on May 1, - Edwin - did say:
> On 2004/05/01, at 1:18, Joe(theWordy)Philbrook wrote:
> > Speaking of which, I don't know what filtering you use, but if it's
> > actually much easier to tell it to search the Subject: header for
> > "[FC]"
> > than to search for a Reply-To: header with "fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx" in
> > it, then I suggest you shop for a better mail filter.
> Huh? Better mail filter? Even crappy mail client can scan a Reply-To:
> header.
Which was my point. The part I was speaking of was where you said it
would be easier for them to set up the filtering...
=> on Apr 30, - Edwin - did say:
=> > if they decided to use filtering then it'd be easier for them
=> > to set it up. (i.e. move all messages with [FC] on subject
=> > line to folder "foobar", etc.)
Now if you think seeing the [FC] in the Subject: will make it easier for
them to think of the concept of filtering because they can see something
to filter on before they even know there is such a thing as an Reply-To:
header... Well I'd concede that's possible. But if we include the
How-To links in the welcome and subscription reminder messages etc...
the lists volume should give them the idea. And being pointed at the
HOW-To might teach them to start looking things up...(well I can dream
can't I)<grin>
> > It's really not the lists fault if new arrivals don't yet know how to
> > filter messages. Besides which, if we add "[FC]" to the Subject: header
> > to make such manual/visual scanning slightly easier,
> Aha! you just said the magic phrase -- "slightly easier"... *that* was
> the main point.
Where as automatic filtering is (_once_set_up_) *MUCH* easier. Some of
us would find the [MC] in the subject to be a pain. I use filtering to
group all the "FC" messages to the same folder, Then I visually Bscan the
displayed portion of the subject to determine if the thread/subject is
worth reading... If you "prepend" the subject with it (like is usually done
with the "Re:" for replies). it would leave less visible subject for me to
use to visually scan for "interesting" reading. And it would, (if a different
subject from the preceding message in the threaded view) not have the
advantage Re: has of being the same as the preceeding... And if a reply
with a refocused subject is deep enough in the thread, then anything arbitrarily
inserted before the senders subject makes visual scan for interesting difficult:
-> N ## mmm dd Sender Identification(size) Original long description of prob
-> N ## mmm dd Sender Identification(size) |-Re:Original long description of
-> N ## mmm dd Sender Identification(size) |-Re:Original long description
-> N ## mmm dd Sender Identification(size) |-Re:Original long descriptio
-> N ## mmm dd Sender Identification(size) |-Newbie hijacked thread inter
-> N ## mmm dd Sender Identification(size) |-Re:Newbie hijacked thread
-> N ## mmm dd Sender Identification(size) |-reply "New subject" Not inte
-> N ## mmm dd Sender Identification(size) |-RE:reply "New subject" Not
-> N ## mmm dd Sender Identification(size) |-interesting "modified su
On the other hand I'd have no objection to [FC] being appended to the
END of the subject:
=> Subject: Original long description of problem [MC]
=> Subject: |-Re:Original long description of problem [MC]
=> Subject: |-Re:Original long description of problem [MC]
=> Subject: |-Re:Original long description of problem [MC]
=> Subject: |-Newbie hijacked thread interesting topic [MC]
=> Subject: |-Re:Newbie hijacked thread interesting topic [MC]
=> Subject: |-reply "New subject" Not interesting topic [MC]
=> Subject: |-RE:reply "New subject" Not interesting topic [MC]
=> Subject: |-interesting "modified subject" with new point [MC]
As this would not interfere with with my visual scanning. While
Prepending it would be very annoying:
=> Subject: [MC] Original long description of problem
=> Subject: |-[MC] Re:Original long description of problem
=> Subject: |-[MC] Re:Original long description of problem
=> Subject: |-[MC] Re:Original long description of problem
=> Subject: |-[MC] Newbie hijacked thread interesting topic
=> Subject: |-[MC] Re:Newbie hijacked thread interesting topic
=> Subject: |-[MC] reply "New subject" Not interesting topic
=> Subject: |-[MC] RE:reply "New subject" Not interesting topic
=> Subject: |-[MC] interesting "modified subject" with new point
Well that's more than enough of that says he to himself... I hope I
didn't waste too much bandwidth on this already {allegedly} tired topic,
to textually illustrate my objection to "[MC]". I just have doubts that it
would be implemented as an append rather than a prepend so I'm wanting
to avoid it any way I can. (smile)
--
| --- ---
| Joe (theWordy) Philbrook <o> <o>
| J(tWdy)P ^
| <<jtwdyp@xxxxxxxx>> /---\ "bla bla bla..."
| \___/ "...and bla..."
At least I know my mouth is running, I just can't find the off button!
