[MB] Subject Prefix

[Mike Burrell]

Thomas,

I would like to make a plea for retaining the subject prefix on this new
listserver. Although received e-mails may be sorted by sender, the
sender I see is the list member. I receive a fair amount of spam, and
while most is caught and diverted, some get through. When I receive
e-mails, I tend to do a visual review for reasonableness, to check
messages against what I expect to receive. No spam device has yet to
include subject prefix on the subject line of the e-mail. Yesterday I
listed two e-mails as junk because they had no subject line at all.
Today there was one with no subject line, but this time I took a look at
it, and it was from Eva (Eva from the North?), so I am glad I did not
list it as junk. Who did I filter out yesterday? If a subject prefix
had been added, I at least would have recognized the sender as belonging
to the list.

I have made the choice of adding my own subject line prefix manually.
This can be similar to the requirement of hitting reply-to-all, and
deleting the individual senders, another manual task that all good users
should prefer to do. I don't mind the reply function, but I really
would like to see the [MB] prefix returned.

Mike

[Alex Frazer-Harrison]

Hi Mike and all

I have to agree that, at the very least, no one should ever send out group
e-mails without subject lines. Many spam filters automatically flag such
e-mails and if people just click reply then all we get are a bunch of
unhelpful "Re: No Subject" subject lines and odds are the discussion will
simply be ignored.

If the system cannot be changed to restore the [MB] I'd like to recommend it
be made a group rule that anyone creating a new discussion thread start the
subject the [MB]. I will begin doing so myself.

Cheers!

Alex

Post by Mike Burrell
Thomas,
I would like to make a plea for retaining the subject prefix on this new
listserver. Although received e-mails may be sorted by sender, the
sender I see is the list member. I receive a fair amount of spam, and
while most is caught and diverted, some get through. When I receive
e-mails, I tend to do a visual review for reasonableness, to check
messages against what I expect to receive. No spam device has yet to
include subject prefix on the subject line of the e-mail. Yesterday I
listed two e-mails as junk because they had no subject line at all.
Today there was one with no subject line, but this time I took a look at
it, and it was from Eva (Eva from the North?), so I am glad I did not
list it as junk. Who did I filter out yesterday? If a subject prefix
had been added, I at least would have recognized the sender as belonging
to the list.
I have made the choice of adding my own subject line prefix manually.
This can be similar to the requirement of hitting reply-to-all, and
deleting the individual senders, another manual task that all good users
should prefer to do. I don't mind the reply function, but I really
would like to see the [MB] prefix returned.
Mike
_______________________________________________
modesty-blaise mailing list
http://mailman.gramstad.no/mailman/listinfo/modesty-blaise

[Paul Treece]

Hi Alex

Putting MB in the subject box would also solve my problem

Paul

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Frazer-Harrison" <***@shaw.ca>
To: "mb" <modesty-***@mailman.gramstad.no>
Sent: Saturday, August 22, 2009 10:25 PM
Subject: Re: [MB] Subject Prefix

Post by Alex Frazer-Harrison
Hi Mike and all
I have to agree that, at the very least, no one should ever send out group
e-mails without subject lines. Many spam filters automatically flag such
e-mails and if people just click reply then all we get are a bunch of
unhelpful "Re: No Subject" subject lines and odds are the discussion will
simply be ignored.
If the system cannot be changed to restore the [MB] I'd like to recommend it
be made a group rule that anyone creating a new discussion thread start the
subject the [MB]. I will begin doing so myself.
Cheers!
Alex

Post by Mike Burrell
Thomas,
I would like to make a plea for retaining the subject prefix on this new
listserver. Although received e-mails may be sorted by sender, the
sender I see is the list member. I receive a fair amount of spam, and
while most is caught and diverted, some get through. When I receive
e-mails, I tend to do a visual review for reasonableness, to check
messages against what I expect to receive. No spam device has yet to
include subject prefix on the subject line of the e-mail. Yesterday I
listed two e-mails as junk because they had no subject line at all.
Today there was one with no subject line, but this time I took a look at
it, and it was from Eva (Eva from the North?), so I am glad I did not
list it as junk. Who did I filter out yesterday? If a subject prefix
had been added, I at least would have recognized the sender as belonging
to the list.
I have made the choice of adding my own subject line prefix manually.
This can be similar to the requirement of hitting reply-to-all, and
deleting the individual senders, another manual task that all good users
should prefer to do. I don't mind the reply function, but I really
would like to see the [MB] prefix returned.
Mike
_______________________________________________
modesty-blaise mailing list
http://mailman.gramstad.no/mailman/listinfo/modesty-blaise

_______________________________________________
modesty-blaise mailing list
http://mailman.gramstad.no/mailman/listinfo/modesty-blaise

[Thomas Gramstad]

Post by Mike Burrell
I would like to make a plea for retaining the subject prefix on this
new listserver. Although received e-mails may be sorted by sender,
the sender I see is the list member. I receive a fair amount of
spam, and while most is caught and diverted, some get through.
When I receive e-mails, I tend to do a visual review for
reasonableness, to check messages against what I expect to receive.
No spam device has yet to include subject prefix on the subject line
of the e-mail. Yesterday I listed two e-mails as junk because they
had no subject line at all. Today there was one with no subject
line, but this time I took a look at it, and it was from Eva (Eva
from the North?), so I am glad I did not list it as junk. Who did I
filter out yesterday? If a subject prefix had been added, I at
least would have recognized the sender as belonging to the list.

No, you wouldn't. Because the Subject Prefix is only added if there
actually is a Subject: in the posting. So when someone posts a
posting without a Subject:, no Subject Prefix will be added, even
if the Subject Prefix attribute is turned on.

And then such postings will not be sorted if you use subject prefix
for sorting, nor will you be able to identify them by looking for a
subject prefix.

This is yet one more reason not to use subject prefix for sorting
or filtering. I urge you as strongly as I can to use the recommended,
standard ways to sort/filter -- primarily List-Id:, or To: and Cc:.

Your e-mail client may not list List-Id: as one of the headers you
may use for sorting. In that case you can either use the menu option
for creating your own headers to filter/sort and enter List-Id: there,
or you can instead choose To: and Cc: from the menu list of headers.

Do a Google search with the name of your e-mail client + "sorting",
"automatic sorting", "folders" or "filtering" in order to find the
specifics for your e-mail client.

There is unfortunately no setting in Mailman for automatically
holding or returning postings without Subject: to the sender, but
it may be possible to add or tweak something, I'll look into it.

Meanwhile it would be nice if every poster try to make sure that
they have a meaningful Subject: before they send. :)

Thomas

[Helen Evans]

Another suggestion is: set up a rule or a filter so that any message
containing 'Modesty' in the subject or Body would be labelled as 'MB',
and/or go directly to an MB folder.

I can certainly try to put 'MB' at the front of any subject line I create...
I'm just not sure I'll always remember!

Helen

[Valerie Polichar]

I'm another person who prefers the subject prefix. I hear what you're
saying, Thomas; I'm just saying this particular mailman option is one
that makes my life easier. I don't sort or filter, I just visually
grep.

If we took a poll and the subject prefix was preferred, would you be
willing to make the change? Or is it a standard for your institution
not to permit these on your mailman installation?

Valerie Polichar

Post by Thomas Gramstad

Post by Mike Burrell
I would like to make a plea for retaining the subject prefix on this
new listserver. Although received e-mails may be sorted by sender,
the sender I see is the list member. I receive a fair amount of
spam, and while most is caught and diverted, some get through.
When I receive e-mails, I tend to do a visual review for
reasonableness, to check messages against what I expect to receive.
No spam device has yet to include subject prefix on the subject line
of the e-mail. Yesterday I listed two e-mails as junk because they
had no subject line at all. Today there was one with no subject
line, but this time I took a look at it, and it was from Eva (Eva
from the North?), so I am glad I did not list it as junk. Who did I
filter out yesterday? If a subject prefix had been added, I at
least would have recognized the sender as belonging to the list.

No, you wouldn't. Because the Subject Prefix is only added if there
actually is a Subject: in the posting. So when someone posts a
posting without a Subject:, no Subject Prefix will be added, even
if the Subject Prefix attribute is turned on.
And then such postings will not be sorted if you use subject prefix
for sorting, nor will you be able to identify them by looking for a
subject prefix.
This is yet one more reason not to use subject prefix for sorting
or filtering. I urge you as strongly as I can to use the recommended,
standard ways to sort/filter -- primarily List-Id:, or To: and Cc:.
Your e-mail client may not list List-Id: as one of the headers you
may use for sorting. In that case you can either use the menu option
for creating your own headers to filter/sort and enter List-Id: there,
or you can instead choose To: and Cc: from the menu list of headers.
Do a Google search with the name of your e-mail client + "sorting",
"automatic sorting", "folders" or "filtering" in order to find the
specifics for your e-mail client.
There is unfortunately no setting in Mailman for automatically
holding or returning postings without Subject: to the sender, but
it may be possible to add or tweak something, I'll look into it.
Meanwhile it would be nice if every poster try to make sure that
they have a meaningful Subject: before they send. :)
Thomas
_______________________________________________
modesty-blaise mailing list
http://mailman.gramstad.no/mailman/listinfo/modesty-blaise