<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 8:10 AM, Kelsay, Brian - Kansas City, MO <<a href="mailto:brian.kelsay@kcc.usda.gov">brian.kelsay@kcc.usda.gov</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Sounded like a bit of good-natured fun to me. :-)<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Billy Crook<br>
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 7:38 PM<br>
<br>
<br>
I'm about to the point of just pulling the power cord out and walking<br>
away in utter disappointment, I swear to god. The problem with the<br>
idea of subject lines is that it presumes the author of a message has<br>
some idea what they're talking about.<br>
<br>
</div><div><div></div></div></blockquote><div><br><br>It's situation based. In some non-task focused discussions topic/subject drift can be a VERY useful tool. In a needing to be structured situation it can frankly wreck historical review value.Trying to use a list archive for problem solving Vs nominal chat is indeed going to change one's feelings on the concept. SO- if we are flogging a political or social dead horse it's less deadly to drift topic/subject lines.<br>
<br>IF we are working on something of future search value then managing subject line to content relationship IS important.<br>And if not? The dangling bit intentional of course..<br> </div></div><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>
Oren Beck<br><br>816.729.3645