On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 10:12:53AM +0900, Rimantas Liubertas wrote: > > Any time you tell someone to completely change the tools (s)he uses, > > you're essentially telling him/her that his/her preferences don't matter. > > That's why. > > What if they don't? I suppose MUAs which cannot handle this stuff > automatically are > pretty rare breed nowadays. There's is nothing wrong with using them, > but it is wrong > to force something needed because of shortcomings (ok, it's not a > shortcoming, it's > "feature") of your preferred MUA on everyone else. Um . . . it wasn't suggested that we should try to accomodate the majority of MUAs, which probably all have certain general classes of features. Instead, it was suggested that everyone use a *specific* MUA to avoid "grief", if I recall the phrasing correctly. Regardless, I for one actually use an MUA that has excellent threading and sorting capabilities, on a platform that allows me to do additional sorting and munging using external tools (mutt on FreeBSD), so that obviously isn't the reason I tend to lean toward wanting a visual marker for this list. My reason is that I want ruby-talk traffic in my main inbox, and I want to sort by thread, but I want to be able to discern ruby-talk (and other list traffic) at a glance. One of the big reasons for this is to be able to more quickly ascertain whether a particular message is spam that has managed to slip through or a badly titled list message -- but that's only one reason. You're apparently assuming that everyone who has different preferences from you is: 1. a luddite with an underfeatured MUA 2. stubbornly unwilling to sort the "right" way 3. trying to make up for personal shortcomings by changing the way the list is managed . . . which is kind of a shitty attitude about your fellow list members. > > Gmail can handle headers without the need to spam subject lines, so can > Mail on OS X, Thunderbird, and I am sure plenty of other mainstream MUAs. > If someone loves his MUA he will have to love its deficiencies to, that's what > love is about, isn't it? So can mutt, which I'm using. My preference for visible list markers has nothing to do with that, and I don't know where you got the idea that anyone that wants to be able to identify the source of a given message at a glance without giving up other identifying information must be using the mail command and sed as his MUA. > > BTW, changing tools from time to time can be a very good idea. Especially if the > change is for the more capable tool. There may be some productivity > loss at first > (but not in MUAs case, I must say), but you are better off in a long run. "Change is good, so use what I do." That's not very helpful. > > My preference is *not to have* redundant marking in the subject line. > And I prefer not to have fixes that fix stuff for 10% and breaks it for the 90%. You're overstating the case. > > Do my preferences matter? Sure. So does your piss-poor attitude about the preferences of others. -- CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ] Amazon.com interview candidate: "When C++ is your hammer, everything starts to look like your thumb."