Mailing List Archive


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [tlug] the philosophy of Subj. (?)



On 24/06/07, Michal Hajek <hajek1@example.com> wrote:

My philosophy of Subj. header says that it should inform the reader
about contents of this particular message. If carefully crafted, it can
save the reader some time and at the same time, it expresses respect of
the writer in the relation to the receiver(s).

You are not wrong.

Relation among different messages should be expressed by using threads.

Except "loose threads" have evolved as a convention, where the subject line is not changed on replies. The vast majority of people use the de-facto convention of:

1) Not changing the Subject line, or
2) When it is necessary, do the "New topic (was: Old topic)" dance

The last time this came up (I'm not having much luck in coaxing
ht://Dig to give me the correct thread; maybe Jim has it?), we
basically agreed that:

1) Jim is free to do what he wants, as he is exactly biding by the RFCs, but
2) We'd appreciate if he honoured the de-facto convention of not
changing Subject lines unless absolutely necessary, and then leaving a
(was: Foo) trail.

Jim agreed, and this topic died until now.

So why you gotta troll, bro? ;)

--
Cheers,
Josh


Home | Main Index | Thread Index

Home Page Mailing List Linux and Japan TLUG Members Links