Why have you sent a copy to me personally? That is quite unnecessary.
----- Original Message ----- > From: TJ Frazier <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > Sent: Friday, 6 January 2012 11:18 AM > Subject: Re: Forum name in subject > > On 1/5/2012 18:56, Terry wrote: >> Surely it is a straightforward matter to filter all emails addressed to > [email protected] >> >> > Surely it is not. You should get two copies of this particular email > (I'll get three). Try to filter your pair into different folders. It may > be possible, by using deep-inside headers; it would not in the least be > straightforward. --/tj/ >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: James Knott<[email protected]> >>> To: [email protected] >>> Cc: >>> Sent: Friday, 6 January 2012 12:29 AM >>> Subject: Re: Forum name in subject >>> >>> Mike Scott wrote: >>>> On 04/01/2012 23:19, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: >>>>> Rob, >>>>> >>>>> Good point. If there is no one who uses this list that > objects in the >>> time window, I'll take it to ooo-dev and from there as appropriate. >>>>> >>>>> - Dennis >>>> >>>> A mild objection here... prefixes at the start of the subject > line clutter >>> a limited screen space. I loath them, and there are better ways of > achieving the >>> end that don't involve overloading the subject text. >>>> >>>> Would it not be better to use an email header to flag the source, > then >>> those that want can use their mail reader to file in suitable places. > (I >>> currently crudely filter on 'to' address and > 'return-path' to >>> achieve this) >>>> >>>> I'm probably a minority of one though :-) >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Please explain how that flag will enable sorting on mail list, as I > mentioned >>> earlier? With a list name in the subject, sorting the mail list by > subject >>> results in all list messages grouped together. Also, in this day& > age, is >>> display space really an issue. Sure, I could filter into different > folders, but >>> that's is not the way I want to read the vast majority of mail I > read. >>> >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: TJ Frazier<[email protected]> >>> To: [email protected] >>> Cc: >>> Sent: Thursday, 5 January 2012 11:21 PM >>> Subject: Re: Forum name in subject >>> >>> On 1/5/2012 06:22, Harold Fuchs wrote: >>>> >>>> "James Knott"<[email protected]> wrote in > message >>>> news:[email protected]... >>>>> Most of the mail lists I participate in include something to > indicate >>>>> the forum name in the message subject. This makes it a lot > easier to >>>>> identify mail list messages from what might otherwise look > like spam. >>>>> Is it possible for this list to do the same? IIRC, the old > OOo list >>>>> included "Users" in the subject line and > libreOffice includes >>>>> "libreoffice-users". >>>> >>>> Isn't the name in the To: header? And isn't that header > visible to >>> all? >>>> >>>> Harold Fuchs >>>> London, England >>>> >>> I strongly favor adding to the subject, because: >>> >>> (1) The "To:" header is not visible until I open the message. > (I might >>> configure Tb to display it, at the cost of not displaying something > more >>> useful.) >>> >>> (2) When the message has "To: Albert CC: ListA, ListB", and I >>> subscribe to both lists, I get two identical copies (three, if I'm > Albert), >>> which any filter is going to assign to the same folder (whichever > filter runs >>> first *must* catch both copies). With subject markers, I can filter > that easily. >>> -- /tj/ >>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
