[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Adding [Cypherpunks] at the beginning of a subject by default

Hash: SHA1

On 04/28/2017 05:07 AM, Avinash Sonawane wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Vasily Kolobkov 
> <polezaivsani at openmailbox.org> wrote:
>> Hey Avinash! No offence, but
> Hello Vasily! Thanks for the reply. BTW I don't see a single
> reason why would someone get offended. :)
>> why don't you tweak your/choose another mail client that can sort
>> messages for you?
> As I said may lists follow the practice of prefixing the list name
> to subject. It helps in quickly identifying the message without
> even clicking on it.
> Now about tweaking the client, which one do you use which gives
> the ability to quickly spot the messages just by having a single
> look at your mailbox?

Thunderbird works for me.  Every message from the CPunks list that
hits the inbox in question lands in a CPunks folder.  New arrivals
cause the folder name in the folders list to change color, and
increment the message count next to the folder name.  "Easy to spot"
becomes a non-issue; new messages are nearly impossible to miss, and
all the messages from the list are viewed in context with the rest of
the messages from the list when the folder is opened.

It is also very easy to create new filter rules to sort a given "from"
address into a CPunks Spam folder, which in my case is about 20% of
the messages from the list.  "One click" enables me to check these for
anything interesting or useful, although such is rarely found.

Adding the list name to every subject line means pushing every subject
line n. spaces to the right, with what I would call redundant visual
clutter.  Looking at the list messages display in Thunderbird I count
six presently visible subject lines that end in ... because they are
longer than the column they appear in, /without/ a redundant list name
in front of them.

> Even if we filter messages we still need to click on the folder
> which contains those messages. I don't see a valid reason for not
> saving a user click and user's time.
> That being said, if there are not enough people who get affected
> by this issue and we decide to continue the current practice I am 
> thinking about using Gmail "Labels". :)

That is GMail's semi-equivalent of filtering messages into folders,
but there's a way better method IMO:  Use Thunderbird.  GMail supports
the IMAP protocol, so a GMail account looks and works "the same as" a
real e-mail account when accessed via Thunderbird.  That also cuts the
attack surface for Google's friendly, harmless Javascript / AJAX right
out of the picture.

Also, Thunderbird + Enigmail = complete and user friendly GPG support
for webmail accounts, with no time consuming failure prone
work-arounds required.

Bit of fun:  GMail's AJAX code repeatedly harvests draft message text
in progress while-u-type, a feature that makes recovery from a browser
crash without lost work possible.  And all your plaintext are belong
to Google.


Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)