From: Chad Perrin <perrin@...>
Date: 2007-09-04T03:19:55+09:00
Subject: Re: subject line

On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 07:22:40PM +0900, Matthias W??chter wrote:
> On 03.09.2007 07:41, Stefan Rusterholz wrote:
> > Devi Web Development wrote:
> >> I don't know who would make this sort of decision, but could we put
> >> [RubyTalk] or [Ruby] or something at the beginning of all messages? It's 
> >> a
> >> fairly common practice on listserves.
> > 
> > Another "No" vote here. As mentioned: you can always let your e-mail app 
> > filter the mails for you and if you need it, let it insert that [Ruby] 
> > or whatever prefix.
> 
> Most people are not aware of the possibility to filter automatically
> by mail headers other than Subject, To or CC (as suggested,
> X-ML-Name == "ruby-talk" or List-Id == "ruby-talk.ruby-lang.org").
> They sit and watch tons of Ruby-Talk mails filling their inbox
> without filtering. They like to spend the day (or the evening)
> manually tagging all mail with a special subject prefix like
> "[Ruby-Talk]" and moving it to a folder, or, even better, read the
> intersting ones and delete the others. It makes them happy and they
> think, they had done a lot of work! They are scared of untagged
> mail, because they could (or already have) inadvertantly delete
> important inbox stuff trating it as mailing list stuff. That's why
> they want the prefix.

Something tells me that those who object to the list software adding
[RUBY] to the subject line would also object to replies mysteriously
including an added [RUBY] in the subject line.  As such, I think using
the possibility for adding that as a justification for preventing the
list software from doing so is a bad idea.

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Rudy Giuliani: "You have free speech so I can be heard."