Ok, I guess the consensus is that we shouldn't change.
Ian. On 5/3/06, Florent Daignière (NextGen$) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* Ian Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-05-03 16:38:25]: > The point is that there is no point. They take up space without > serving any useful purpose. This is a particular problem for those > with limited-width mail readers such as Mutt or Pine. > > Ian. > I'm using mutt and honestly don't mind/haven't seen any problem. NextGen$ > On 3 May 2006, at 16:17, John C.C.White wrote: > > >OK. I'll disagree: > > > >- the list is low-volume > >- Subject: headers rarely overflow my (entirely reasonable) space > >allocated > >- I haven't seen any bogus [freenet-devl] messages (yet). > > > >Really, what's the point/need? > > > >-John- > > > >On May 3, 2006, at 6:47 PM, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > >>This makes a pretty persuasive argument for ditching the [freenet- > >>devl] subject tags on mailing list emails: > >> > >> http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/qralston/writing/tagging-harmful/ > >> > >>If nobody can come up with a good argument against this, I suggest > >>we follow its advice and remove the Subject tags. > >> > >>Ian. > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Devl mailing list > >>[email protected] > >>http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Devl mailing list > >[email protected] > >http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > > > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > [email protected] > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
