to the list owner(s)

[Glen Barber]

On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Billie Erin Walsh <bilwalsh at swbell.net> wrote:
> Probably going to make a few enemies.
>

Agreed.

> There has been a LOT of chatter about e-mail lately. I've read it and
> kept my mouth shut, so far.
>
> For the information of many. Not responding to any one person in
> particular. However, you know what they say about shoes fitting.
>
> There are a lot of people in this world that are not so anal retentive
> that they:
>
> Feel they _HAVE_ to keep _EVERY_ e-mail they've ever received.

Some people have really good memories.  Some people have really bad
memories.  I have both.  I have moments where I think "I know I
remember seeing this in a list somewhere..."  Keeping all 25706
(currently) threads in my mailbox is a convenience.

> Feel they _HAVE_ to neatly pigeon hole _EVERY_ e-mail into it's nice
> neat little box.

See my previous comment.

> Feel they _HAVE_ to thread all their e-mail.

Why wouldn't you?

> Clutter up their online e-mail in-box with all the stuff they download
> and filling up their ISP's e-mail server with all the old mail they have
> already downloaded and read.
>

If an ISP/webmail provider allots, for example, 5GB of mail space and
you are (even remotely) close to filling that, see my previous two
comments.

> [ Shrinks say that some of the above behavior is a sign of a sick mind ]
>
> Some people DO: [ GASP ]
>
> Download their e-mail from the server and delete off the server.
> Read the e-mail that comes in AND:
>    Keep the bits and pieces that they feel important.

Define "important."

>    Respond to what they feel they must.
>    DELETE everything else.
> Read their mail online from their ISP deleting as they go.
>
> [ I know this may be hard for some to believe but they do ]
>
> Of the hundred or so e-mail lists I'm on there are only two or three
> that don't identify in the subject line. Not identifying is NOT "The
> Standard". Identifying seems to be more standard than not.
>

The users at httpd.apache.org is the _only_ list that I am on that does
this.  I personally find it to be an annoyance.  I'd rather filter
based on List-Id than some obscure subject prefix.

> Now IF someone could give the OP a _REAL_, non-personal opinion,
> non-emotional, answer to her question it might be nice.
>
> GEEZ, just jump on a person for asking a simple question.
>
>

I haven't seen anyone "jump on" the OP for their question.  I saw
legitimate responses (and a few sparks).  The "spark" I am replying to
makes me certain this thread will soon turn into a flame-war.


-- 
Glen Barber