Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 17:07:13 -0600 From: Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Tagging email subject line with something like [fbsd-questions] Message-ID: <20070425230713.GA83094@demeter.hydra> In-Reply-To: <20070425220220.J1379@duane.dbq.yournetplus.com> References: <294439d20704250627h60a5b5dcx49f4dd6b34c2caa1@mail.gmail.com> <462F5D64.4020105@dial.pipex.com> <a969fbd10704251351t36e0b1aeh3dd4afec3c25bb2e@mail.gmail.com> <20070425220220.J1379@duane.dbq.yournetplus.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 10:03:59PM +0000, Duane Hill wrote: > On Wed, 25 Apr 2007, Jeff Mohler wrote: > > >I dont think subject tagging is poor at all. > > > >whats poor is overly long poorly organized subject lines..but hey..[FBSDQ] > >aint all that long. > > Then you get someone who either doesn't a) trim the subject or b) the > client response as such: > > Re: [FBSDQ] Re: [FBSDQ] bla bla bla Since the list is what would attach [FBSDQ] to the subject, it would be the list that wasn't behaving itself if that happened. -- CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ] "There comes a time in the history of any project when it becomes necessary to shoot the engineers and begin production." - MacUser, November 1990
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070425230713.GA83094>