[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: OR fix the prefix of eachmessage header

From: Karl E. Jorgensen
Subject: Re: OR fix the prefix of eachmessage header
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 22:08:31 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.25i

On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 08:51:33PM +0300, leos wrote:
> Dear Karl,
> Thank you for your interesting comments...
> >> 
> >> ==========================================
> >> Jochen Schnapka          Re: <some subject description>
> >> ==========================================
> >As far as I can see, you're using M$Outlook. You should able to change
> >which columns are displayed for each message. Try right-clicking on the
> >column headings, perhaps?
> What I can't understand is why many people here try to teach others 
> with basical things and press them in their way of work. Why many
> people don't believe that others can have their good reasons for 
> doing things their ways?

I'm sorry if I gave that impression: I'm not trying to *press* anybody
into any specific way of working.

My intention was only to *help*; it's up to everybody to decide for
*themselves* to decide what way is best. And in order to make an
informed decision, it helps to *know* some "other ways" too...

I suspect that English is not your first language, so misunderstandings
can result from that. No problem. I'm Danish (15 east deg, 55 deg

> Yes I did use M$OL just for the last message as every recipient could 
> see (e.g. now I use different way) but it is not important. Do you 
> really believe that it is very senseful to include next "To:" column 
> because of 1% of messages that you propose to identify that way?

The percentages will vary depending on which & how many mailing lists
you subscribe to, how much junk mail you get, number of friends, phase
of the moon and what your boss had for breakfast. 

Most other mailing lists that I subscribe to add a "X-Mailing-List: "
header to all emails, and this can then be used for filtering and
identification. I had to add a rule in .procmailrc to add that header
myself for e.g. gnokii. I suspect it depends on what software is running
the list.

> >> Are some 3 characters of the prefix so high tax to be unacceptable?
> >On most systems, you can have the system sort the mail for you, e.g. by
> >using procmail. Or use scoring techniques in mutt. Lots.
> Again the same problem: teaching.. ;)) I thought we were not discussing

See my comment above. Note that I didn't actually go *against* the
prefix. I just tried to give you a way to work *with* it (Guidance !=

> how to sort or distribute messages (that everybody knows) but how to 
> identify them convenient way for everyone, weren't we? What I need is 
> getting a fast visual orientation in one chronolically sorted list. 
> Hence not subject sorting or including additional columns or beaking 
> the list in many partial boxes. 

As long as you're aware of the disadvantages (somebody else already
mentioned those in this thread, so I won't bother), and feel that the
advantages outweigh the disadvantages, them I'm fine with that.

> That's why I asked owners to add some 3-char identification prefix.
> I still believe it is acceptable for everyone.

and I don't mind removing them in my incoming filter (gotta learn perl
anyway) and adding the X-Mailing-List: header. Then I get them
colour-coded and prioritised the way I like it too..

Karl E. Jørgensen
==== Today's fortune:
"Never make any mistaeks."
(Anonymous, in a mail discussion about to a kernel bug report.)

Attachment: pgpAg4QSSkJOU.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]