Re: should the mail list be splitted resp. sub-tagged ?

[Robert Pluim <rpluim@gmail.com>]

Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com> writes:

> [Forgot to reply-all - sorry about that. Apologies to Robert for
>  the duplicate email.]
>

This is why I have Mail-Copies-To: never in my headers :) No biggie.

> Robert Pluim <rpluim@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Nick Dokos <nicholas.dokos@hp.com> writes:
>> 
>> > Štěpán Němec <stepnem@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> 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.
>> >> 
>> >> I have never understood why anyone would like anything like that.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Because I can scan my inbox at a glance and triage quickly. Here's what
>> > I see (with mh-e in emacs as my reader):
>> >
>> 
>> (disclaimer: I've been seeing this argument for the best part of 20
>> years, I doubt I'm bringing anything new to the table, but I feel
>> strongly about it)
>> 
>> Triage is for *computers* to do, they're much better at it than humans.
>> 
>
> You are kidding, right? How does the computer know what *I* need to do?
>

Because you tell it what to do?

>> Also, those markers in the subject are obnoxious and *really* annoying,
>> and take up valuable screen space.  Please don't clutter up the org-mode
>> emails for zero benefit.
>> 
>
> It is *not* zero benefit to me.

OK.  Zero benefit to people who split their email then.  I must admit
I've never understood why people don't, but to each his own.

Robert