Re: [TUHS] off-topic list

Hello. Grant Taylor via TUHS wrote in <89e5ae21-ccc0-5c84-837b-120a1a7d9e26@spa\ mtrap.tnetconsulting.net>: |On 06/22/2018 01:25 PM, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote: |> True, but possible since some time, for the thing i maintain, too, |> unfortunately. It will be easy starting with the next release, however. | |I just spent a few minutes looking at how to edit headers in reply |messages in Thunderbird and I didn't quickly find it. (I do find an |Add-On that allows editing messages in reader, but not the composer.) Oh, I do not know: i have never used a graphical MUA, only pine, then mutt, and now, while anytime before now and then anyway, BSD Mail. Only once i implemented RFC 2231 support i started up Apple Mail (of an up-to-date Snow Leopard i had back then) to see how they do it, and that was a brainwave because they i think misinterpreted RFC 2231 to only allow MIME paramaters to be split in ten sections. (But then i recall that i have retested that with a Tiger Mail once i had a chance to, and there the bug was corrected.) Graphical user interfaces are a difficult abstraction, or tedious to use. I have to use a graphical browser, and it is always terrible to enable Cookies for a site. For my thing i hope we will at some future day be so resilient that users can let go the nmh mailer without loosing any freedom. I mean, user interfaces are really a pain, and i think this will not go away until we come to that brain implant which i have no doubt will arrive some day, and then things may happen with a think. Things like emacs or Acme i can understand, and the latter is even Unix like in the way it works. Interesting that most old a.k.a. established Unix people give up that Unix freedom of everything-is-a-file, that was there for email access via nupas -- the way i have seen it in Plan9 (i never ran a research Unix), at least -- in favour of a restrictive graphical user interface! |> Yes. Yes. And then, whilst not breaking the thread stuff as such, |> there is the "current funny thing to do", which also impacts thread |> visualization sometimes. For example replacing spaces with tabulators |> so that the "is the same thread subject" compression cannot work, so |> one first thinks the subject has really changed. | |IMHO that's the wrong way to thread. I believe threading should be done |by the In-Reply-To: and References: headers. | |I consider Subject: based threading to be a hack. But it's a hack that |many people use. I think Thunderbird even uses it by default. (I've |long since disabled it.) No, we use the same threading algorithm that Zawinski described ([1], "the threading algorithm that was used in Netscape Mail and News 2.0 and 3.0"). I meant, in a threaded display, successive follow-up messages which belong to the same thread will not reiterate the Subject:, because it is the same one as before, and that is irritating. [1] http://www.jwz.org/doc/threading.html |> At the moment top posting seems to be a fascinating thing to do. | |I blame ignorance and the prevalence of tools that encourage such behavior. I vote for herdes instinct, but that is a non-scientific view. We here where i live had the "fold rear view mirrors even if not done automatically by the car" until some young men started crashing non-folded ones with baseball bats (say: who else would crash rearview mirrors, i have not seen one doing this, but a lot of damaged mirrors by then), and since a couple of years we have "cut trees and hedges and replace with grass", which is really, really terrible and i am not living at the same place than before. Many birds, bats etc. think the same, so i am not alone; i hope this ends soon. I can have a walk to reach nightingales, though, and still. I would hope for "turning off the lights to be able to see a true night sky", but .. i am dreaming. |> And you seem to be using DMARC, which irritates the list-reply mechanism |> of at least my MUA. | |Yes I do use DMARC as well as DKIM and SPF (w/ -all). I don't see how |me using that causes problems with "list-reply". | |My working understanding is that "list-reply" should reply to the list's |posting address in the List-Post: header. | |List-Post: <mailto:tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org> | |What am I missing or not understanding? That is not how it works for the MUAs i know. It is an interesting idea. And in fact it is used during the "mailing-list address-massage" if possible. But one must or should differentiate in between a subscribed list and a non-subscribed list, for example. This does not work without additional configuration (e.g., we have `mlist' and `mlsubscribe' commands to make known mailing-lists to the machine), though List-Post: we use for automatic configuration (as via `mlist'). And all in all this is a complicated topic (there are Mail-Followup-To: and Reply-To:, for example), and before you say "But what i want is a list reply!", yes, of course you are right. But. For my thing i hope i have found a sensible way through this, and initially also one that does not deter users of console MUA number one (mutt). --End of &lt;89e5ae21-ccc0-5c84-837b-120a1a7d9e26(a)spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net&gt; Cheerio. --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt)