This discussion has died down. My conclusion is that no change is to be requested, since there is no consensus on labeling the subject with an identifier of the list.
I will not be doing anything to take this to the wider ooo-dev list. - Dennis ASSESSMENT: Here is my appraisal of the positions that have been expressed: +1 James Knott (original request) +1 Stuart +1 Rob Unsworth +1 TJ Frazier +1 Robert Funnell +1 R C Ingham +1 Stuart +0 Dave Fisher (leaning +0.5) 0 Andrea Pescetti (neutral but sees value for user lists) 0 Paul M. Nguyen (not opposed but header filtering works) ? Gene Young (pointed out that To often has list name) ? Harold Fuchs (also considers To sufficient) ? Shane Curcuru (shows how to set filters on deeper headers) ? Rob Weir (sees no benefit, only downside) ? David B Teague sr (doesn't care about prefix if other info works) -1 Mike Scott -1 Terry -1 Larry Gusaas -----Original Message----- From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 09:59 To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Forum name in subject [ ... ] There can be subject headers or not. Currently there are no additions to the subject line. If there is not enough consensus here on adding subject headers ("[ooo-users]" being the obvious choice because there are other ooo- lists), then I will not take such a proposal to the ooo-dev list and the list will stay as is. I will abide by what I see here. Repeated arguments pro and con and assertions about what tools work and what tools don't are interesting in demonstrating how diverse the toolcraft is, but won't figure into my assessment. I doubt there is a one-size-fits-all solution. It will just be the pro- and con-ness that I assess. It would also be useful to know how many are indifferent to whichever way it goes. - Dennis [ ... ] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
