From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Andrew J. Korty" Subject: Re: should the mail list be splitted resp. sub-tagged ? Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 07:15:25 -0500 Message-ID: <91598.1292588125@iu.edu> References: <4D0B24DA.2050201@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=55420 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PTZWT-0008VV-4N for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 07:35:03 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PTZDe-0004J4-5z for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 07:15:30 -0500 Received: from locrian.uiso.iu.edu ([149.166.143.64]:56155) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PTZDe-0004Iv-36 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 07:15:30 -0500 Received: from iu.edu (cpe-173-89-199-0.indy.res.rr.com [173.89.199.0]) by locrian.uiso.iu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPA id DBA582DE79C for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 07:15:26 -0500 (EST) In-reply-to: <4D0B24DA.2050201@gmail.com> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Org-mode ml Torsten Wagner wrote: > Thinking of tags, I wonder why we use [Orgmode] since all mails > coming from emacs-orgmode(a)gnu.org which is a strong indicator > already. Not sure I agree with splitting the list, but the [Orgmode] tag is definitely superfluous. Who has a mail client that can't filter on the List-Id field? ajk