Re: [CentOS] [OT] Message-ID Threading w/Subject Append Example -- WAS: pine rpm for centos 4
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:29:00 -0500 (EST), Joshua Baker-LePain jlb17@duke.edu wrote:
I'm sorry, but making decisions based on Stupid User Tricks is about the worst policy I can imagine. That way lies madness.
No, where lies madness is in the self-centred way in which some people make demands of others to alter innocuous behaviour so that the data requirements of some MUA or other, that may or may not support generally accepted conventions , that may or may not be suitably configured, might be satisfied.
I read mailing lists as digests. Message threading is of no use to me outside of threaded web archives, that I seldom use in such fashion. Neither is the subject content of much significance beyond keying me as to whether some section of a digest may be of particular interest. This is not to say that these features have no value, only that my circumstances realize little any from them. However, I have been taken to task nonetheless, because my personal preferences do not meet with the approval of some. It is this presumption that irritates me.
I am not a member of this list simply to ease the administrative burdens that some people create for themselves. I seek information and informed opinion on technical issues related to the equipment I am responsible for and the vocation I profess, not quasi-religious debates on the morality of certain widely held but hardly universal conventions. I sometimes (rarely) am in the possession of a piece of information that may prove helpful to another, and so I offer on occasion. However, in the main this list is my way of reaching beyond my own ignorance. Usually I am in the position of supplicant and I have found the people on this list generally as helpful and usually as well informed as other lists that I frequent.
But I am concerned about the general tenor of some of the discussions here and how these may lead to ill-feeling in some and a disinclination to actively participate in others. We are all infinitely ignorant, it is just that some of us possess a predisposition to stay within that which we find familiar and others find it easier to take adventures.
Neither tendency is good or bad, they are just personal preferences. It would be more comfortable for the list membership, and improve the decorum of the messages considerably, if people from one camp or the other, and the many of us that straddle both albeit on different issues, displayed a willingness to accommodate the other side and recognize that there are many important reasons, not all of which we may agree with, why someone chooses to do things a certain way.
Complaining about people's email habits, particularly in public, where the content is not the issue strikes me as pointless, self- indulgent in the extreme, and reflects most poorly on the personality of the complainant.
Sincerely, Jim
-- *** e-mail is not a secure channel *** mailto:byrnejb.<token>@harte-lyne.ca James B. Byrne Harte & Lyne Limited vox: +1 905 561 1241 9 Brockley Drive fax: +1 905 561 0757 Hamilton, Ontario <token> = hal Canada L8E 3C3
On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 10:16 -0500, James B. Byrne wrote:
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 11:29:00 -0500 (EST), Joshua Baker-LePain jlb17@duke.edu wrote:
I'm sorry, but making decisions based on Stupid User Tricks is about the worst policy I can imagine. That way lies madness.
No, where lies madness is in the self-centred way in which some people make demands of others to alter innocuous behaviour so that the data requirements of some MUA or other, that may or may not support generally accepted conventions , that may or may not be suitably configured, might be satisfied.
I read mailing lists as digests. Message threading is of no use to me outside of threaded web archives, that I seldom use in such fashion. Neither is the subject content of much significance beyond keying me as to whether some section of a digest may be of particular interest. This is not to say that these features have no value, only that my circumstances realize little any from them. However, I have been taken to task nonetheless, because my personal preferences do not meet with the approval of some. It is this presumption that irritates me.
I am not a member of this list simply to ease the administrative burdens that some people create for themselves. I seek information and informed opinion on technical issues related to the equipment I am responsible for and the vocation I profess, not quasi-religious debates on the morality of certain widely held but hardly universal conventions. I sometimes (rarely) am in the possession of a piece of information that may prove helpful to another, and so I offer on occasion. However, in the main this list is my way of reaching beyond my own ignorance. Usually I am in the position of supplicant and I have found the people on this list generally as helpful and usually as well informed as other lists that I frequent.
But I am concerned about the general tenor of some of the discussions here and how these may lead to ill-feeling in some and a disinclination to actively participate in others. We are all infinitely ignorant, it is just that some of us possess a predisposition to stay within that which we find familiar and others find it easier to take adventures.
Neither tendency is good or bad, they are just personal preferences. It would be more comfortable for the list membership, and improve the decorum of the messages considerably, if people from one camp or the other, and the many of us that straddle both albeit on different issues, displayed a willingness to accommodate the other side and recognize that there are many important reasons, not all of which we may agree with, why someone chooses to do things a certain way.
Complaining about people's email habits, particularly in public, where the content is not the issue strikes me as pointless, self- indulgent in the extreme, and reflects most poorly on the personality of the complainant.
---- as someone who has attempted to solve problems by searching the archives, let me assure you that the value of threaded posts/replies makes this a usable method. When the threads are broken, it becomes impossible to trace through an issue and it's solution.
Just a thought for your consideration. I'm not going to comment on any other issues that you raise.
Craig
"James B. Byrne" ByrneJB@Harte-Lyne.ca wrote:
No, where lies madness is in the self-centred way in which some people make demands of others to alter innocuous
behaviour
so that the data requirements of some MUA or other, that
may or
may not support generally accepted conventions , that may
or
may not be suitably configured, might be satisfied.
Agreed. People should be _understanding_ of others. I find that 80% of the time when someone complains about someone's posting format, it is not the posting format they are really complaining about, but their target in general -- the posting format is just one thing they want to focus on, in the hope of getting others to join in.
I'd rather someone just use a two-word phrase and get it out of their system, than than to make an entire thread about what everyone can disagree on. ;->
You will _never_ hear me complain about the posting format of others. I don't expect others to do anything I want, but in return, I expect others to respect the logic behind my approach. The only time I even bring anything up is when someone feels it necessary to rebuke me on my approach. I've been using my approach for 16 years, starting with NNTP and, now in the days of the web, SMTP with web-based archives. In fact, for lists that use SMTP-to/from-NNTP gateways, Message-ID is the _only_ commonality.
Again, it's a subject which a lot of people can just disagree on and talk about forever. Not surprisingly, it's the time when everyone who doesn't like someone else can come out of the woodwork and having something to disagree with them about. Sigh.
I read mailing lists as digests.
People need to remember that people who are on digests won't track Message-ID. Or at least the common way digests are generated in text format.
Now Mailman _does_ offer MIME encapsulated digests so the original Message-ID and other headers can be tracked. But this format is rather complex for most mail readers. I've found it works very well in Evolution, although I've had mixed results with web-based readers. Hence why most lists don't use it.
So before you complain about someone on-list, be considerate that someone might be on the digests. A perfect way would be to ask them _off-list_. And, in general, keep such things off-list in general, because it only adds to the noise (much like I'm doing right now -- yeah, I'm a hypocrite ;-).
We are all infinitely ignorant,
So true!
Complaining about people's email habits, particularly in public, where the content is not the issue strikes me as pointless, self-indulgent in the extreme, and reflects most poorly on the personality of the complainant.
But it's how some people can find "common ground" to complain about someone they don't like, so they indulge a bit too much instead of actually focusing on what they really don't like about the other person.
And, frankly, GMail has given a lot of people a whole new avenue.
-
Bryan J. Smith -
Craig White -
James B. Byrne