Re: [spoon-discuss] SB reply-to

[Joel Uckelman <uckelman@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thus spake Daniel Lepage:
> 
> On Aug 1, 2004, at 5.24 PM, glotmorf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> > On 1 Aug 2004 at 17:20, Daniel Lepage wrote:
> >
> >> On Aug 1, 2004, at 4.56 PM, glotmorf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'd get off my butt and vote for it being s-b and s-d in the 
> >>> header...
> >>
> >> How would you rank these choices?
> >> 	1) Keep the long tags
> >> 	2) Use the short tags
> >> 	3) Put in new headers
> >> 	4) Don't add anything
> >>
> >> I have rankings already from me, Phil, bd, SkArcher, Teucer, and sort
> >> of from Sagitta (e said "2 or 4. I like approval voting.")
> >>
> >> In the future, I hope this is the sort of thing the Minister of
> >> Communications would be in charge of.
> >
> > Given those four, I'd say:
> >
> > 2 - s-b and s-d
> > 4 - certainly don't make it any longer
> > 3 - This would depend on what "put in" means.  If it means making it 
> > longer, I'd prefer 1 over
> > it.  Otherwise, if it's still clear yet shorter, this works for me.
> 
> By 'new headers' I mean new mail headers, so there'd be a 
> Bnomic-From:discussion or something added to the headers (and nothing 
> added to the subject).

Those already exist. Check the List-* headers.
 
_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss