Post by thread:Subject sort tag

On Mon, 3 Jan 2000, piclist.com wrote: > The official FAQ for the PICList is at.... > http://www.piclist.com > > who would have guessed <GRIN> Amazing. Something logical... Would it be too much to ask that the piclist provide a subject tag like most other lists do? It's trivial to enable it in majorodomo, but it makes it a lot easier for dumb software to filter the incoming mail (and dumb eyeballs as well). Subject: [PIC] .... is but 6 extra characters and makes it a heck of a lot easier to sort the real mail from the spam, particularly given the volume of mail on this list. TIA Robert spam_OUT--Robert.RolfTakeThisOuTUAlberta.ca "If 'debugging' is the process of removing errors, then 'programming' must be the process of putting them in".

Why Can't you just do this with your E-Mail program? You know the message is always going to be from .....PICLISTKILLspam@spam@MITVMA.MIT.EDU Subjects are really trival and there is alot of room for people to mess with that. Just create a filter based on the E-Mail to field. Eudora can do it. Outlook Express can do it. Put it in its own folder and viola. {Original Message removed}

On Mon, 3 Jan 2000, Darren King wrote: > Why Can't you just do this with your E-Mail program? You know the message It's brain dead. Pine on a unix box (that way I can read my mail from anywhere in the world via telnet, and not have to worry about a web cafe's config, or where my mail got stored). > is always going to be from PICLISTKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU Yes, I realize that. > Subjects are really trival and there is alot of room for people to mess with > that. But they CAN'T mess with the [tag] since the listserver reinserts it if it's missing. You guys go to the trouble of putting in [OT], so whats so difficult about having a [PIC] all the time? I've seen threads on this list which were also happening on another, at the same time (BCD conversion). Luckily the other list had a [tag] so that it was easier to tell them apart. > Just create a filter based on the E-Mail to field. Eudora can do it. > Outlook Express can do it. Put it in its own folder and viola. MicroSolth OS's. shudder... I simply mention this because of the 30 odd lists I'm on, this is one of the very few that -doesn't- supply a subject tag. It makes it much harder to sort by eye. So what's the objection? Refinement is bad? I'm not the only one sorting by eye. It's not like you guys USE the full subject line width, or bother to change them when the topic changes. Just my 3c worth (2c US). Robert

Robert Rolf wrote: > > On Mon, 3 Jan 2000, Darren King wrote: > > Why Can't you just do this with your E-Mail program? You know the message > > It's brain dead. Pine on a unix box (that way I can read my mail from > anywhere in the world via telnet, and not have to worry about a web cafe's > config, or where my mail got stored). man procmail -- Mike Werner KA8YSD | "Where do you want to go today?" ICQ# 12934898 | "As far from Redmond as possible!" '91 GS500E | Morgantown WV | Only dead fish go with the flow.

Suggested this, Jory voted no, Oh well. It'd be [PICList] anyways, not [PIC], if we turned that on in the listserver. Mark Robert Rolf wrote: {Quote hidden}> > On Mon, 3 Jan 2000, piclist.com wrote: > > The official FAQ for the PICList is at.... > > http://www.piclist.com > > > > who would have guessed <GRIN> > > Amazing. Something logical... > > Would it be too much to ask that the piclist provide a subject tag like > most other lists do? It's trivial to enable it in majorodomo, but it makes > it a lot easier for dumb software to filter the incoming mail (and dumb > eyeballs as well). > > Subject: [PIC] .... > > is but 6 extra characters and makes it a heck of a lot easier to sort > the real mail from the spam, particularly given the volume of mail on this > list. > > TIA > > Robert > .....--Robert.RolfKILLspam.....UAlberta.ca > "If 'debugging' is the process of removing errors, then 'programming' must > be the process of putting them in". -- I re-ship for small US & overseas businesses, world-wide. (For private individuals at cost; ask.)

Mark Willis wrote: > > Suggested this, Jory voted no, Oh well. It'd be [PICList] anyways, not > [PIC], if we turned that on in the listserver. Actually, it'd be [PICLIST]. And each individual can turn it on if they really want that feature. I did and that's how it's now showing up in the subject line. In the future I'll probably edit it back out of the subject line. I'm quickly becoming somewhat amazed at just how much each user can configure for their individual account on the server. -- Mike Werner KA8YSD | "Where do you want to go today?" ICQ# 12934898 | "As far from Redmond as possible!" '91 GS500E | Morgantown WV | Only dead fish go with the flow.

*Mark Willis wrote: *> *> Suggested this, Jory voted no, Oh well. It'd be [PICList] anyways, not *> [PIC], if we turned that on in the listserver. * *Actually, it'd be [PICLIST]. And each individual can turn it on if they *really want that feature. I did and that's how it's now showing up in the *subject line. * IT IS?

"Quitt, Walter" wrote: > > *Mark Willis wrote: > *> > *> Suggested this, Jory voted no, Oh well. It'd be [PICList] anyways, > not > *> [PIC], if we turned that on in the listserver. > * > *Actually, it'd be [PICLIST]. And each individual can turn it on if > they > *really want that feature. I did and that's how it's now showing up in > the > *subject line. > * > > IT IS? I thought it would. Is it not showing up for you? If not, then even better. That would mean the server is picking it back out. As I am typing this reply in Netscape, the subject line reads: Re: [PICLIST] Subject sort tag If the [PICLIST] part is not showing up for you, then the server must be removing it. If that is indeed the case, then the server software is smarter than I thought it was. -- Mike Werner KA8YSD | "Where do you want to go today?" ICQ# 12934898 | "As far from Redmond as possible!" '91 GS500E | Morgantown WV | Only dead fish go with the flow.

Nope, nada...No [PICLIST] -W WA6FEC -----Original Message----- From: Mike Werner [EraseMEreznaeousspam_OUTTakeThisOuTEARTHLINK.NET] Sent: Monday, January 03, 2000 2:30 PM To: PICLISTspam_OUTMITVMA.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: Subject sort tag "Quitt, Walter" wrote: > > *Mark Willis wrote: > *> > *> Suggested this, Jory voted no, Oh well. It'd be [PICList] anyways, > not > *> [PIC], if we turned that on in the listserver. > * > *Actually, it'd be [PICLIST]. And each individual can turn it on if > they > *really want that feature. I did and that's how it's now showing up in > the > *subject line. > * > > IT IS? I thought it would. Is it not showing up for you? If not, then even better. That would mean the server is picking it back out. As I am typing this reply in Netscape, the subject line reads: Re: [PICLIST] Subject sort tag If the [PICLIST] part is not showing up for you, then the server must be removing it. If that is indeed the case, then the server software is smarter than I thought it was. -- Mike Werner KA8YSD | "Where do you want to go today?" ICQ# 12934898 | "As far from Redmond as possible!" '91 GS500E | Morgantown WV | Only dead fish go with the flow.

On Mon, Jan 03, 2000 at 03:42:15PM -0500, Mike Werner wrote: > man procmail All it took for me was to add these lines to my ~/.procmailrc file :0 * ^To:.*@spam@PICLISTKILLspamMITVMA.MIT.EDU /home/me/PIClist And as a result all mail to the PIClist was pre-sorted into a folder. Then I have an alias to run my mail reader against that folder. I do not believe such functionality should be part of a mail reader. -- James Cameron KILLspamquozlKILLspamus.netrek.org http://quozl.us.netrek.org/

Robert Rolf wrote: > You guys go to the trouble of putting in [OT], so whats so difficult > about having a [PIC] all the time? Because [OT] is efficient. It's called "exception" flagging. Adding superfluous data to *every* message is not. Many/ most of us are efficiency hounds. That's why we don't want dork trailers to tell people who probably don't read trailers anyway, how to unsubscribe. The *main* problem I have with those tags being a great nuisance is that if a reply is sent prefixed "Re:", then the server prefixes the "Re:" with the tag. Since the mailreader groups mail prefixed "Re:" with otherwise identical topics without that prefix, this function is defeated by the tag and whilst the tagged mail is viewed as a subject group, replies are separated from originals. Intelligent programs it seems, can group mail automatically by "Resent-from" so the messages are sufficient without extra subject baggage. -- Cheers, Paul B.