From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: =?utf-8?B?xaB0xJtww6FuIE7Em21lYw==?= <stepnem@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: should the mail list be splitted resp. sub-tagged ?
Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2011 20:49:47 +0100
Message-ID: <87vd245u04.fsf@gmail.com>
References: <4D0B24DA.2050201@gmail.com>
	<AANLkTin-VZAm9K5DOmRe0KKxQpxyW1aOWkKVbcgRDHM9@mail.gmail.com>
	<87ei8sae89.fsf@gnu.org> <87zkrg600j.fsf@gmail.com>
	<87ei8s1qta.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=54296 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PaCys-0007vS-UM
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2011 14:55:45 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stepnem@gmail.com>) id 1PaCvS-0007qE-Mm
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2011 14:52:11 -0500
Received: from mail-fx0-f41.google.com ([209.85.161.41]:65515)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stepnem@gmail.com>) id 1PaCvS-0007pq-Gr
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Jan 2011 14:52:10 -0500
Received: by fxm12 with SMTP id 12so7839927fxm.0
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Tue, 04 Jan 2011 11:52:09 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <87ei8s1qta.fsf@gnu.org> (Bastien's message of "Tue, 04 Jan 2011
	19:12:17 +0100")
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Bastien <bastien.guerry@wikimedia.fr>
Cc: Org-mode ml <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>

Bastien <bastien.guerry@wikimedia.fr> writes:

> Hi =C5=A0t=C4=9Bp=C3=A1n,
>
> =C5=A0t=C4=9Bp=C3=A1n N=C4=9Bmec <stepnem@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> FWIW, I do. Having [Org] (or anything, really) prepended to the subjects
>> of _all_ mails coming from a list that is already uniquely identifiable
>> (e.g. by its address) has no information value altogether (unlike
>> [Babel], [PATCH] etc.) and only takes up the much precious Subject:
>> header space.
>
> Not that reducing the label from [Orgmode] to [Org] already seem to be a
> progress in the right direction :)
>
> Would you object having [Org] instead of [Orgmode]?

Well, I wrote "anything", so, yeah ;-) But I actually usually read the
list through Gmane, so I'm mostly unaffected (and Gnus can also strip
the list identifier automatically). I still find any kind of such
server-side mangling Evil (see also Robert Pluim's reply, most of which
I could just sign myself), but from Nick Dokos' reply I see that for
people putting all incoming mail into one single place and not able or
willing to do anything more than that it can have its uses, so, each to
their own I guess...

Thank you for consideration,

  =C5=A0t=C4=9Bp=C3=A1n