to the list owner(s)

[Derek Broughton]

Billie Erin Walsh wrote:

> BUT, it's not given in a place that is user readable until you open the
> mail. When I look down my list of mail I see subject, sender, and
> date/time. Yours for instance is:

See, that's just plain untrue.  Good mail programs (including gmail online)
can show you whatever identification you want.  Or you could just filter it
to a folder

> Not having the list identified in the Subject line can be just as
> annoying as having it there is to others. If I'm looking down a list of
> forty or fifty e-mails there is no way to know it's from any list.

> Sure, there are innumerable ways e-mail can be sorted into nice neat
> pigeon holes but what about those that choose not to have their mail
> sorted that way?

You would rather inconvenience those of us who know how to use our mail
programs.

> Actually, the only possible answer to why the list is not identified in
> the subject is, "Because we don't want it that way!" Not to start
> ragging about how any sensible person pigeon holes their mail. Some
> don't want it that way.

BS.  You started ragging in your first post.  It's not "because we don't
want it that way", it's because there is NO GOOD REASON to do it in the
first place.

> It's such a minor annoyance in my life I don't even care. What I do care
> about is the person that first posted and got a WHOLE LOT of advice that
> had nothing whatsoever to do with her post. 

It had _everything_ to do with her post.


> [ not in those words but that was the tone ]
> 
Neither in those words, nor that tone.

-- 
derek