From: Bill Davidsen (davidsen@prodigy.com)
Date: Thu Mar 07 2002 - 09:26:46 CST
On Mon, 4 Mar 2002, Martin Djernaes wrote:
> I really have a problem with this draft suggesting to use Re: and only Re:
> as prefix, and especially that some people think that the way to get this
> through to the world is by filtering out mails with have a prefix different
> than Re: (and no I haven't tested with NEW: etc., but I know that some
> admins - with reference to this draft - ignore mails from people). Doing
> this is leading to distrust in the news system, and is just another way to
> say "please keep of my news server, newbe". The Subject field is let to the
> user to enter, and he/she can enter New: Ot: Btw: or something else in the
> subject. This should never leave to a mail being discarded as "non
> compliant".
The user can enter anything s/he pleases, but the use of Re: certainly
qualifies as current practice, and is treated specially by many clients.
I see no good argument for deleting the special meaning of this notation.
As for adding other forms, why? To avoid having users learn a two letter
prefix? To complexify news tools? To satisfy politically correct
English-phobes who are too ignorant to know that the phrease comes from
Latin? Hah!
There should be a good reason for changing current practice, and I just
don't see any such reason.
-- -bill davidsen (davidsen@prodigy.com) "The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the last possible moment - but no longer" -me