Re: Message Subject Tagging

[Guest guest]

Quoting Idol <Idol@...>:

> You can use forms like " POLITICS: USDA rules on grass-fed

> labeling " , or " USDA rules on grass-fed labeling -- POLITICS " or whatever

> else you like as long as placement makes the tag visibly distinct from

> the rest of the subject.

I would recommend against prefixing the subject line with " POLITICS: " ,

because some e-mail clients will, according to rules which I don't pretend

to understand, sometimes remove colon-delimited prefices (Yeah, you heard

me. Prefices.) from the subject line when replying.

--

Berg

bberg@...

[Guest guest]

I'm on a list that requires the use of subject tags with a colon, and

the colons don't seem to be a problem. That list is the most smoothly

run list I've ever been on. Here are part of the guidelines:

" Each post to the list should contain an all-caps header in the

subject line. Using a CAPITALIZED HEADER makes it easier for members

to scan posts and read or delete as suits them. Examples are: QUESTION

or Q: (for posting questions or answers), DISCUSSION:, JOB: (for job

postings), SUMMARY: (to summarize answers which have been posted to a

question, SITESEEING: (to recommend a site), and INFO:. Look at the

headings used in other posts and you'll get the idea.

" If you post a QUESTION to the group, you owe the list a SUMMARY. When

you receive answers, remove the responders' names and submit a

summary. "

Of course those are subjects geared to that particular list. I think

my favorite part of that list is that when someone asks a question, a

summary is always posted by the person asking the question. I can then

keep the summaries of the subjects I'm interested in, rather than a

bunch of individual emails.

But I realize each list has it's own " personality " and what works best

for one list may not work best for another.

~Fern

Re: Message Subject Tagging

> Quoting Idol <Idol@...>:

> > You can use forms like " POLITICS: USDA rules on grass-fed

> > labeling " , or " USDA rules on grass-fed labeling -- POLITICS " or

whatever

> > else you like as long as placement makes the tag visibly distinct

from

> > the rest of the subject.

>

> I would recommend against prefixing the subject line with

" POLITICS: " ,

> because some e-mail clients will, according to rules which I don't

pretend

> to understand, sometimes remove colon-delimited prefices (Yeah, you

heard

> me. Prefices.) from the subject line when replying.

[Guest guest]

That would be so great if we could do something similar on this list,

especially the part about the QUESTION and SUMMARY part, imagine how much

more useful (and less time consuming) consulting the archives would be.

--

*Awesome Idea* -----Original Message-----

*Awesome Idea* From: Fern [mailto:readnwrite@...]

*Awesome Idea* Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 9:30 AM

*Awesome Idea* That list is the most smoothly

*Awesome Idea* run list I've ever been on. Here are part of the guidelines:

*Awesome Idea*

*Awesome Idea* " Each post to the list should contain an all-caps

*Awesome Idea* header in the

*Awesome Idea* subject line. Using a CAPITALIZED HEADER makes it

*Awesome Idea* easier for members

*Awesome Idea* to scan posts and read or delete as suits them.

*Awesome Idea* Examples are: QUESTION

*Awesome Idea* or Q: (for posting questions or answers),

*Awesome Idea* DISCUSSION:, JOB: (for job

*Awesome Idea* postings), SUMMARY: (to summarize answers which

*Awesome Idea* have been posted to a

*Awesome Idea* question, SITESEEING: (to recommend a site), and

*Awesome Idea* INFO:. Look at the

*Awesome Idea* headings used in other posts and you'll get the idea.

*Awesome Idea*

*Awesome Idea* " If you post a QUESTION to the group, you owe the

*Awesome Idea* list a SUMMARY. When

*Awesome Idea* you receive answers, remove the responders' names

*Awesome Idea* and submit a

*Awesome Idea* summary. "

[Guest guest]

-

>I would recommend against prefixing the subject line with " POLITICS: " ,

>because some e-mail clients will, according to rules which I don't pretend

>to understand, sometimes remove colon-delimited prefices

Interesting. Any idea which clients we're talking about? I've never run

into that problem myself, but then my past list/group/forum administration

experience didn't include mailing lists.

> (Yeah, you heard

>me. Prefices.)

I heard you, so to speak, but " prefices " appears in no dictionary I can

find online (even using OneLook's meta-dictionary search) and yields only

1210 google hits compared to " prefixes " , which yields about 700,000 and

shows up in multiple dictionaries, so I'm not sure what point you're trying

to make.

-

[Guest guest]

Fern-

I'm afraid the system you describe would absolutely not be appropriate for

this list. The POLITICS tag is a fair compromise, and I believe we're

already seeing that it can work, but requiring a vast array of tags, not to

mention summaries with every question -- fuggedaboutit.

>But I realize each list has it's own " personality " and what works best

>for one list may not work best for another.

-

[Guest guest]

Idol wrote:

> -

>

>> I would recommend against prefixing the subject line with

>> " POLITICS: " , because some e-mail clients will, according to rules

>> which I don't pretend to understand, sometimes remove

>> colon-delimited prefices

>

> Interesting. Any idea which clients we're talking about? I've never

> run into that problem myself, but then my past list/group/forum

> administration experience didn't include mailing lists.

Outlook Express, for one. I sent myself an e-mail with the subject

" Test: Test, " and when I replied, I ended up with " Re: Test. " Then I

tried " POLITICS: Test, " which was transformed to " Re: POLITICS: Test. " I

guess maybe it has something to do with length. The idea, I guess, is to

get rid of things like " Re: Fw: Fw[4]: Do: Re: Mi: Bw: YOU WONT BELIEF

THIS!!!!11eleven, " but it occasionally trims meaningful prefixes as

well.

>> (Yeah, you heard

>> me. Prefices.)

>

> I heard you, so to speak, but " prefices " appears in no dictionary I

> can find online (even using OneLook's meta-dictionary search) and

> yields only 1210 google hits compared to " prefixes " , which yields

> about 700,000 and shows up in multiple dictionaries, so I'm not sure

> what point you're trying to make.

None whatsoever. I just like misapplying productive rules. Especially

between midnight and dawn. I bet Mike would appreciate it

greatlily.