Subject: RE: Small request...
From: [email-masked] (Michael Lemke, Sternwarte Bamberg, Phone: +49-951-9522216)

15 Apr 1998 13:20:07 -0700
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked],
        [email-masked]
X-Unparseable-Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 14:06:25 MET-1MET DST

In a message of Tue, 14 Apr 1998 11:05:45 -0000
Received on Wed, 15 Apr 1998 13:52:11 MET-1MET DST

Jimen Ching <[email-masked]> wrote
to: [email-masked] <[email-masked]>

>On Wednesday, April 08, 1998 10:02 AM, Guy Gascoigne - Piggford 
>[SMTP:[email-masked]] wrote:
>> Could we NOT do this.  The answer to simpler filtering is use a mailer that
>> can filter correctly, not bung up the subject lines with stuff that can be
>> deduced from other header fields.  Any combination of Sender, To or CC
>> containing gnu-win32 should do the job.
>
>I see many people opposing these requests, but I have yet to see a good
>reason why it shouldn't be done.  

Simple (hypothetical output):

MAIL> DIR/NEW
                                                                         NEWMAIL
    # From                 Date         Subject

   56 SMTP%"[email-masked] 15-APR-1998  Re: [cygwin] Terminal Emulator for Win
   57 SMTP%"shoppa@alph02. 15-APR-1998  Re: [cygwin] Help, DLT way too slow   
   58 SMTP%"[email-masked]. 15-APR-1998  Re: [cygwin] UCX SMTP question        
   59 SMTP%"VAXman@TMESIS. 15-APR-1998  Re: [cygwin] Date simulation on VAX an
   60 SMTP%"[email-masked] 15-APR-1998  $$$ Earn money being honest and smart 
   61 SMTP%"[email-masked] 15-APR-1998  Re: [cygwin] several failed builds on 
   62 SMTP%"jmaynard@phoen 15-APR-1998  Unix geek with a VAX                  
   63 SMTP%"ARMISTEJ@oeca. 15-APR-1998  RE: [CYGWIN] So...without a manual, ho
   64 SMTP%"ARMISTEJ@oeca. 15-APR-1998  RE: [CYGWIN] User written system servi
   65 SMTP%"KilleenJ@IDMIN 15-APR-1998  DECUS LA - Some thoughts from a "old t
   66 SMTP%"sugalskd@osshe 15-APR-1998  Re: [cygwin] several failed builds on 
   67 SMTP%"[email-masked] 15-APR-1998  Re: [cygwin] So...without a manual, ho
   68 SMTP%"shoppa@alph02. 15-APR-1998  Re: [cygwin] The Saga Continues, and T
   69 SMTP%"bovideoNOSPAME 15-APR-1998  Re: [cygwin] Standalone backup on dat 

See how all the subject lines are cut at the end?

>Just because there are alternatives doesn't
>mean it is a bad idea.  Second of all, filtering on 'Sender', 'To' and/or
>'CC' doesn't always work because some people use aliases for the mailing
>list address.  If you filter [email-masked], you will miss these
>messages.  

How many are those?  1 in some hundred according to my experience. 
Filtering on the current headers works well enough for all practical
purposes.

>Adding a keyword in the subject line in all messages distributed
>by the mailing list will guarantee that the filter will trap it.

But *I* can't read the subject anymore.

>
>Why is it bad to 'bung up' the subject line?  What's so special about a
>subject line that you shouldn't 'bung it up'?

The display should never exceed 80 chars.  That's why you don't put your
message in the subject field ;-)

Michael

--
Michael Lemke
Sternwarte Bamberg, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany
([email-masked] or [email-masked])
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"[email-masked]" with one line of text: "help".