Brackets

[Chris Fowler]

try "reply-to-all" Mr. Developer

and in the spirit of developers (a group i am a part of as well) let's tell
people what we CAN'T do and how far out of scope it is and blah blah blah.
whatever happened to CAN-DO attitudes. This is such a small thing and we
used to have kclug in the subject lines.

I'm done with this thread.

-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Hammitt [mailto:tony at speedscript.com]
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 10:05 AM
To: Chris Fowler
Subject: Re: Brackets

The only reason why I'm arguing against adding [kclug] to all of the subject
lines is that for the vast majority of us who already
have the lug stuff going to a separate folder, the information is completely
superfluous.  It will also break many of the thread
detectors in mail programs.

It's also a tiny bit more work for Mike, our sysadmin, who is not only
donating his time but the bandwidth and the box to run stuff
on.

And I am a software developer. =-]

    Tony

----- Original Message -----
From: Chris Fowler <chris at ingeniusinc.com>
To: <kclug at kclug.org>
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2001 9:13 AM
Subject: RE: Brackets

> sheesh just give the man some brackets.
>
> you sound like software developers.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Don Erickson [mailto:derick at shark.zeni.net]
> Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2001 4:52 PM
> To: kclug at kclug.org
> Subject: Re: Brackets
>
>
> In article <3A9DC236.D299F00F at kc.rr.com> you write:
>
> >I'm sure that you could make up a procmail rule to append the [KCLUG] to
> the
> >beginning of your local copy of the subject line, that way everyone's
> happy.
>
> I'm already happy, I filter on a ^Received: line.  A bracketed tag has
> become something of a mailing list convention, but certainly everybody
> doesn't need to be conventional.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> -Don
> --
>  .sig lite
>
>
>
>
>
>
>