Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (4053 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [SLE] mail threading (reply & new mail)
- From: phil <phil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 07:34:38 -0700
- Message-id: <01080307343804.07460@lead>
You know your fighting a dead battle if your talking about MUA's that are
starting new threads via the Subject: Field.
If (god forbid) I fired up windows and used thebat! you would see rather
nice little Re: , Re[1]: , Re[2]: , Re:[3]: , Re[4]: in there. Technically
in my opinion this would be a better method of threading since each message
is a seperate thing, and why not have a seperate number reflect that fact.
Most folks accept the fact a Re: is inserted on most lists around the world
in most languages. You might also see a bunch of PGP signatures and at
least 1 cut line (tearline) and at least 4 lines, possibly 6 lines of what
ever I wanted to put in. If that is my business phone, my pgp key number
(since I have more than 10 keys) or whatever else maybe I just want to
advertise a website or a bbs. See now that I have discussed more than just
the subject field technically I could change the subject to reflect say:
Re: [SLE] mail threading (Advertizing and Tearlines)
Now if your talking about changing the entire subject, sometimes that is just
as valid a move, it depends on what is being discussed. If it is just a
thread and the thread changes, then why no change the Subject field to
reflect that. On the other hand, if you don't like the Subject field then
it's easy enough to change it yourself and create a new thread to more
properly reflect the subject matter. What I noticed on this list which does
not change is the address in the From Field. and that leads me to believe
that it would be quite simple to create a filter to just trash the messages
that you do not like to see. Some MTA's and MUA's are smart enough to even
delete messages off the server before they reach any of you mbox's. By the
way there is more information about the Subject field if you read the RFC's.
I don't think it's anyone's right to get annoyed about the Subject field, it
isn't annoying behavior. Anyone remember Fidonet and "Annoying Behavior?"
Routing is annoying, Foul language is anoying, But subject lines? Remember
That Sometimes the Subject line in a new thread can be a good thing. Say
when you have found the answer to a problem, For example: Re[8]: my bla bla
is broken (FIXED!!!) One might be more apt to read a message body with that
subject if they were in a hurry or searching for an answer.
What I find more annoying is Advertisements.
For example:
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Small business owners...
Tell us what you think!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
============
============
To Post a message, send it to: Ihateadvertizing@xxxxxxxxxxx
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
Ihateadvertizing@xxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Unless you get a lot of people to agree with you then your not going to get
the RFC changed, and until you have a moderatro start posting a bunch of
rules once a week and kicking people off the lists your probably just going
to have to live with it. You could impose a bunch of strict rules on people
but you are very likely to both chase the people away and create yourself a
PR nightmare. Too many rules can make a mail list quite unpleasant, and
possibly even censored. (try sending Dr. Laura an email) Unless you have
infinate funding then you can deal with PR pretty easy by throwing money at
the problem like many others do. I can tell you my friend I hope that day
doesn't come, because I will be the first to find an alternative. Even if I
have to make a Regexp to filter out the crap example I made above... So be it.
I hope you don't take this the wrong way, it's just some things I have
noticed in the few short years I have had a computer. It was meant to help
understand why people do what they do.
On Friday 03 August 2001 01:27 am, you wrote:
> > Or at least remove the In-Reply-To: header field manually, if they do it
> > with reply.
>
> Which I don't think is an option in Kmail 2.1.2 (which I use). Which in
> turn leads me to suggest the simplest solution, that generally *will* work
> to solve this:
>
> Just don't start a new thread by replying to an old one :)
>
> On a sidenote:
> I'd actually been meaning to ask about this whole threading-business in
> Kmail, since I've seen these (seemingly random) subthreads appearing...
>
> Looks like I got the answer :)
>
> Jon Clausen
starting new threads via the Subject: Field.
If (god forbid) I fired up windows and used thebat! you would see rather
nice little Re: , Re[1]: , Re[2]: , Re:[3]: , Re[4]: in there. Technically
in my opinion this would be a better method of threading since each message
is a seperate thing, and why not have a seperate number reflect that fact.
Most folks accept the fact a Re: is inserted on most lists around the world
in most languages. You might also see a bunch of PGP signatures and at
least 1 cut line (tearline) and at least 4 lines, possibly 6 lines of what
ever I wanted to put in. If that is my business phone, my pgp key number
(since I have more than 10 keys) or whatever else maybe I just want to
advertise a website or a bbs. See now that I have discussed more than just
the subject field technically I could change the subject to reflect say:
Re: [SLE] mail threading (Advertizing and Tearlines)
Now if your talking about changing the entire subject, sometimes that is just
as valid a move, it depends on what is being discussed. If it is just a
thread and the thread changes, then why no change the Subject field to
reflect that. On the other hand, if you don't like the Subject field then
it's easy enough to change it yourself and create a new thread to more
properly reflect the subject matter. What I noticed on this list which does
not change is the address in the From Field. and that leads me to believe
that it would be quite simple to create a filter to just trash the messages
that you do not like to see. Some MTA's and MUA's are smart enough to even
delete messages off the server before they reach any of you mbox's. By the
way there is more information about the Subject field if you read the RFC's.
I don't think it's anyone's right to get annoyed about the Subject field, it
isn't annoying behavior. Anyone remember Fidonet and "Annoying Behavior?"
Routing is annoying, Foul language is anoying, But subject lines? Remember
That Sometimes the Subject line in a new thread can be a good thing. Say
when you have found the answer to a problem, For example: Re[8]: my bla bla
is broken (FIXED!!!) One might be more apt to read a message body with that
subject if they were in a hurry or searching for an answer.
What I find more annoying is Advertisements.
For example:
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Small business owners...
Tell us what you think!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
============
============
To Post a message, send it to: Ihateadvertizing@xxxxxxxxxxx
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
Ihateadvertizing@xxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Unless you get a lot of people to agree with you then your not going to get
the RFC changed, and until you have a moderatro start posting a bunch of
rules once a week and kicking people off the lists your probably just going
to have to live with it. You could impose a bunch of strict rules on people
but you are very likely to both chase the people away and create yourself a
PR nightmare. Too many rules can make a mail list quite unpleasant, and
possibly even censored. (try sending Dr. Laura an email) Unless you have
infinate funding then you can deal with PR pretty easy by throwing money at
the problem like many others do. I can tell you my friend I hope that day
doesn't come, because I will be the first to find an alternative. Even if I
have to make a Regexp to filter out the crap example I made above... So be it.
I hope you don't take this the wrong way, it's just some things I have
noticed in the few short years I have had a computer. It was meant to help
understand why people do what they do.
On Friday 03 August 2001 01:27 am, you wrote:
> > Or at least remove the In-Reply-To: header field manually, if they do it
> > with reply.
>
> Which I don't think is an option in Kmail 2.1.2 (which I use). Which in
> turn leads me to suggest the simplest solution, that generally *will* work
> to solve this:
>
> Just don't start a new thread by replying to an old one :)
>
> On a sidenote:
> I'd actually been meaning to ask about this whole threading-business in
> Kmail, since I've seen these (seemingly random) subthreads appearing...
>
> Looks like I got the answer :)
>
> Jon Clausen
| < Previous | Next > |