OT: Etiquette (was Re: Excessive scrubs)

[Hannah <hannah@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi!

On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 03:04:16AM -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:

>     I think what he was referring to was the fact that I do not use a mail
>interface that supports the use of optional headers for threaded reading of
>mail by subject similar to the way threaded USENET newsreaders do it.

While "References" for mail is rather new and very optional,
"In-Reply-To" is standardized in RFC822, i.e. very old already, and if
your mail reader program set it, it'd be enough for most thread
displays. If you're not the administrator of the box, you can still
ask the administrator of the box to fix at least the generation of
"In-Reply-To".

>[...]

>>Respectfully Scott, some would consider your signature / long quote, w/ 
>>multiple rows of asterisks & dashes a bit excessive.  Doesn't bother me 
>>particularly, but would some.

>[...]

>     Many people also would consider my .signature not to be excessive,
>and there are many whose .signature blocks are far larger than mine, some
>so much so that I would also be inclined to object if the owner were a
>frequent poster.  FWIW, mine has gone through many changes over the years,
>but I like the way it is at present.  If I run across another quotation that
>I happen to like better, I may replace it.  For mailing list use, I normally
>omit the postal address lines anyway as below.

One most important thing could possibly be to separate it using the "-- "
convention. Then at least a few mail reader programs would offer the
option to hide it/grey it out and to hide it from the quotes in replies.

Kind regards,

Hannah.
***********************************************************************
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx with
unsubscribe or-talk    in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/