Re: posting Re: debian-user-digest Digest V2011 #1198
On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 06:45 +0000,
> On 23/06/11 00:01, lee wrote:
> > Scott Ferguson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> >> On 22/06/11 21:53, Camaleón wrote:
> >>>> On 21/06/11 23:29, Camaleón wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 09:21:01 -0300, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI
> >>>>>> But at least you did not reply to a digest.
> >>>>> Sure. I'd say digests are for reading more than
> >> And I am in absolute agreement with you!
> > Hm, I wonder why anyone is going to the lengths of replying
> to digest
> > messages rather than just subscribing to the list ...
> You could just ask the person.... (look for the "Digest"
> subject line)
> I've had to replied to posts from digests - I edit out the
> digest cruft
> rather than perpetuate an abomination.
> For convoluted reasons I subscribe to a digest from another
> list - I
> edit my responses carefully though. While some will argue that
> ruins the
> header information - the purpose is to make indexing for
> searching, and
> threading by subject line, work. Not to provide a forensics
> trail for
> the anally retentive.
It's easier for GNU mailman digest. There you get the subject line and
you easily can copy and paste it, so at least I won't forget to do it,
while I sometimes forget to do it for the Debian list.
Another issue for the Debian digest is, that even HTML formatted spam
isn't eliminated, hence scrolling through the Digest is annoying. People
writing to the list should do it by plain text only, so it would be easy
to eliminate HTML based spam.
IMO Digest should be for replies too, not only to lurk the list. You can
read the archive if you only would like to lurk.