Re: [tlug] [RFC] Proposed method for TAGGING subjects

["emiddleton@example.com" <emiddleton@example.com>]

Josh Glover wrote:
> On 09/08/2007, Edward Middleton <edward.middleton@example.com> wrote:
>
>   
>> The proposed layout.
>>
>> [type tag][level tag] the current subject line with embedded [category tags]
>>     
>
> Did you see my email on this?

Which one, the one where you denied that lack of time was a reason for
experts drifting away from TLUG, and demanded I find proof, or the one
where you 'have thought about it a lot' but given no analysis or
reasoning or even comment on what has been said just decreed that it
should be policy to reject tagging in email subject lines.  I am really
trying to read this in the most positive light, but come on,  denying
the problem then insisting on codifying the status quo!

> Any tagging that is to be officially encouraged will have to happen in the body of the email, save a few
> like [SUMMARY], [C&C], etc.

Have you given equal consideration to the effectiveness of this
approach, it would seem to be less effective and something that very few
would be prepared to do.

> I will actively discourage tagging in the subject line, as I think it hurts accessibility to new list members

Are you prepared to hold other things that *may* hurt accessibility to
new users to the same standard.  Things like referring to firefox as ff.

> --some of whom may not even be Unix newbies (like Mattia, Gernot, et al.)--

Did you read their emails, think about the problem. i.e. to many email
that are not of interest to the reader.

"However, I don't want to split by topic or by author or by keyword, I would prefer the contents of the posts to be on-topic as far as possible"


"I wonder if it might be possible to split the ML more? I am thinking
along the lines of an analogue to web forums"

The proposed solution would give a reader a reasonable method of sorting
emails into a forum like structure.  Adding extensive tags to the body
would make this more difficult.

> and it is important to TLUG to keep getting fresh blood.
>   

as is getting fresh points of view.  I really don't have a problem with
you disagreeing about this, but it would be good if you could at least
accept that this is an issue and think realistically about how it might
be resolved.

Edward