Ralf Mardorf <
ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net> writes:
> Re: posting Re: debian-user-digest Digest V2011 #1198
>
> instead of
>
> Re: posting
>
> is breaking the thread?
for example, [1] and [2] and [3].
We have some options here:
1.) filter your posts so they go to the junk group or are quietly
deleted
2.) use scoring so your posts are marked read or aren't displayed
anymore and ignore them
3.) tell you how to improve so that your posts become worthwhile to read
Option 3.) is off topic, the others are probably not what you would
want.
[1]: http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html#toc2
[2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
[3]: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855
> For Evolution it usually isn't reformatted, of cause sometimes I get
> neverending lines when I reply, but this also happens for non-digest
> replies.
>
> And yes, sometimes mails are bad reformatted for Evolution too, but this
> also isn't related to digest replies.
Have you considered using a decent MUA, like mutt or gnus?
> I can filter emails for my client, but not for the provider's server.
> I don't want to receive 800 mails a day, so I prefer digest.
There are only about a hundred or so mails on this list per
day. Obviously, replying to messages received in digest format doesn't
work for you. Digests are not meant for replying to the messages they
contain, they are meant for reading only. You are receiving the messages
anyway, just not as separate messages, so what difference does it make?
Is your MUA only able to handle a very few messages?
> The Debian list does cause most of the Spams I get.
The amount of SPAM in this list is remarkably low, if you don't count
badly designed posts and messages sent in HTML.
How many SPAM messages did you receive in this list today or yesterday?
>> Also. How someone can forget to copy the Subject line - when, if
>> replying to normal (not Digest) messages - it's not necessary.
>
> It doesn't happen that often and usually for this list.
And it happens for debian-user because you're using the digest in a way
it was never meant to be used?
> If standards are that important, GNU mailman would be the better
> choice to avoid issues.
Issues like?
> Debian isn't fine with Firefox and Thunderbird, hence they change some
> things, add bugs and call it Iceweasel and Icedove. Debian isn't fine
> with GNU mailmen, hence they use another format for the mailing list.
There's nothing wrong with the format of this mailing list, or is there?
That Debian has issues with applications like Firefox, Thunderbird and
Seamonkey is another topic. Mailman is in Debian testing; if it's not
used to run the many Debian mailing lists, there are probably good
reasons for that. That's a different topic as well.
> And now replying to digest is unwanted? What is digest for? For reading
> only? There's an archive, that can be used for reading only.
You can reply to messages in the digest all you want; there's nothing
unwanted about it. What is not wanted are badly designed posts, poorly
chosen subjects and broken or missing References: and In-Reply-To:
headers.
Yes, as has been said a few times already, *digests are for reading
only*. Web-based archives don't exactly replace them because viewing
them requires you to be online all the time; search functions may be
poor; threading might not work very well; it's probably hard to forward
a message you find in a digest to yourself for keeping it for reference.
You could be looking for a solution of a problem that prevents you from
being able to browse a digest that is stored on a remote computer: Your
internet connection might not be available or your X server doesn't run
so that you're limited to the console and text-based browsers like lynx
that don't make it exactly easy or convenient to browse web-based
mailing list archives.[4]
Anyway, digests did exist before computers were connected to the
internet all the time and reading mailing lists usually was done while
being offline. Still I'm not sure why they were invented, they don't
make sense to me.
[4]: I've almost 100k messages in debian-user, and I keep them because I
sometimes do search them for some solution. How do you do that with
a web-based archive?
> Mozilla isn't origin Linux software. I'm using Evolution, it's still
> more buggy than Mozillas are, I can't change this OTOH did you test if
> the reformatted mails are ok when viewing them by Thunderbird instead of
> Icedove?
You could use a decent MUA, and you're not even limited to using only
one exclusively.
Why do you use Evolution when it's so buggy? It's not like there weren't
good alternatives available.
> I planed to read more and to write less, at the moment I reply very
> often,
That's another reason to make it easier for yourself --- and for us ---
by switching to a decent MUA and subscribing to the list instead of its
digest.
> but I won't switch between digest and "normal" when the amount of my
> replies is higher or lower.
Whatever you want, but don't expect anyone not to ignore you because of
badly designed posts.
Archive: [🔎] 871uykpj08.fsf@yun.yagibdah.de" target="_blank">http://lists.debian.org/[🔎] 871uykpj08.fsf@yun.yagibdah.de