From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robert Pluim Subject: Re: should the mail list be splitted resp. sub-tagged ? Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2011 09:15:33 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4D0B24DA.2050201@gmail.com> <87ei8sae89.fsf@gnu.org> <87zkrg600j.fsf@gmail.com> <12023.1294167155@gamaville.americas.hpqcorp.net> <13784.1294171351@gamaville.americas.hpqcorp.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=46395 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PaOXI-0004kr-UP for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 03:16:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PaOXI-0007kd-GO for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 03:16:01 -0500 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:44254) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PaOXI-0007kK-2j for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 03:16:00 -0500 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PaOXA-00065p-Rr for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 09:15:52 +0100 Received: from lns-bzn-49f-81-56-191-143.adsl.proxad.net ([81.56.191.143]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 09:15:52 +0100 Received: from rpluim by lns-bzn-49f-81-56-191-143.adsl.proxad.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 05 Jan 2011 09:15:52 +0100 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: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Nick Dokos writes: > [Forgot to reply-all - sorry about that. Apologies to Robert for > the duplicate email.] > This is why I have Mail-Copies-To: never in my headers :) No biggie. > Robert Pluim wrote: > >> Nick Dokos writes: >> >> > Štěpán Němec wrote: >> > >> >> FWIW, I do. Having [Org] (or anything, really) prepended to the subjects >> >> of _all_ mails coming from a list that is already uniquely identifiable >> >> (e.g. by its address) has no information value altogether (unlike >> >> [Babel], [PATCH] etc.) and only takes up the much precious Subject: >> >> header space. >> >> >> >> I have never understood why anyone would like anything like that. >> >> >> > >> > Because I can scan my inbox at a glance and triage quickly. Here's what >> > I see (with mh-e in emacs as my reader): >> > >> >> (disclaimer: I've been seeing this argument for the best part of 20 >> years, I doubt I'm bringing anything new to the table, but I feel >> strongly about it) >> >> Triage is for *computers* to do, they're much better at it than humans. >> > > You are kidding, right? How does the computer know what *I* need to do? > Because you tell it what to do? >> Also, those markers in the subject are obnoxious and *really* annoying, >> and take up valuable screen space. Please don't clutter up the org-mode >> emails for zero benefit. >> > > It is *not* zero benefit to me. OK. Zero benefit to people who split their email then. I must admit I've never understood why people don't, but to each his own. Robert