Let it be as it is now On Thu, 2003-08-21 at 12:43, Chris Cappuccio wrote: > Hey folks, > > ALL LIST MEMBERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO RESPOND AND MAKE A CHOICE AS TO HOW > THEY WANT THIS BASIC FUNCTION OF THE LIST TO CONTINUE OPERATING. > > The subject header is going to change. > > This is a survey to see whether people want: > > 1. To have no subject prefix, that is, we remove [Full-Disclosure] > or > 2. To shorten the subject prefix from [Full-Disclosure] to [FD] > or > 3. Do nothing > > 1. The first choice is preferable for me and, I would hope, for most folks. > Len says he didn't really want it when he started the list anyways. So we are > actually going to change it now. > > 2. Choice two may be preferable for people who can only filter their incoming > messages based on the subject prefix. So, if you WANT there to continue > to be a subject prefix, SPEAK UP!!! > > 3. Choice three sucks and if anyone wants this SPEAK UP so we know just > how many people want this. This is the least preferrable as it clutters > the Subject header and makes the list harder to read through for those of us > using a text based e-mail client. > > For those of you using procmail or a compatible filter, a good match > for Full-Disclosure that relies on headers you will always see in > list messages goes like this: > > :0: > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] > full-disclosure > > That matches this header: > > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Alternately, you can tell your Pegasus/Mozilla/Outlook/OE/Whatever > to match on this header. -- Noldata TAC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
