[clue-tech] Mail headers, threading, and etiquette.

[David L. Anselmi]

Here are some mail headers:

> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 14:30:25 -0700
> From: "Jed S. Baer" <cluemail at jbaer.cotse.net>
> To: clue-tech at cluedenver.org
> Message-Id: <MTAwMDAyOS5qYmFlcg.1293139831 at quikprotect>
> In-Reply-To: <623590.69620.qm at web110514.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
> References: <MTAwMDAwOC5qYmFlcg.1293075216 at quikprotect>
>     <623590.69620.qm at web110514.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Subject: Re: [clue-tech] RSS Parser for any 'P' language

 > Message-ID: <311599.57482.qm at web30804.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
[...]
> Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 13:58:42 -0800 (PST)
> From: David Williams <dkwloki-clue at yahoo.com>
> To: CLUE technical discussion <clue-tech at cluedenver.org>
> In-Reply-To: <MTAwMDAyOS5qYmFlcg.1293139831 at quikprotect>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Subject: [clue-tech] Any experience w/HP Pavilion good or bad?

Notice the subject lines.  Not related, right?

Notice the first Message-Id and the second In-Reply-To.  That's how sensible mailers facilitate 
threading conversations.  I'm sure there are some that don't.  Those are bad because threading is 
useful.  But I know you don't care whether your mailer sucks because you don't have to read what you 
write.

You should be aware that your messages might contain more information than you think.  If you want a 
new message, write a new message.  If you want a reply, write a reply.

I know.  It sucks to try to write a new message to a group that got a previous message so you just 
use reply to all.  But you don't need that on mailing lists.

Now go ahead and flame away.  But if you do I'll use "Re: [clue-tech] clue-tech Digest, Vol 57, 
Issue 4" for the subject in further posts. ;-)

Dave