Re: [O] Re: [Orgmode] Splitting mailing list

[Nick Dokos]

Bastien <address@hidden> wrote:

> Julien Danjou <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > On Mon, Feb 28 2011, Bastien wrote:
> >> I changed the [Orgmode] tag to [O].  
> >
> > Couldn't you just drop it?
> >
> > Seriously, this [O] is useless and ridiculous.
> 
Not to me.

> No, it's useful to people who filter emails through the subject line.
> 

Just to clarify my usage (since I was one of the people who
argued for keeping a tag): I don't have an MUA filter for this (that
would be easy enough to change) - the filter is my eyes: if I have time
to spend on org-mode, I will look at an email tagged [Orgmode] [fn:1]
If not, I skip it. If there is no distinguishing characteristic at this
level, I have to resort to other methods just to see whether the email
is relevant to me at this time (usually the author name is enough to
classify the email correctly, but not always of course, in which case
I might have to read (some of) the email to decide.) The tag saves me
time.

I sympathise with Samuel's reasons for maximizing information, hence I
did not oppose the shortening of the tag. But this is the second time
that I have had to defend keeping the tag and I hope that the rest of
you will sympathise with my reasons for keeping the tag.

Thanks,
Nick

Footnotes:

[fn:1] or [Org] or [O] - I would have preferred [Org] but I'm willing to
live with [O].