Unless we go to the Topics idea I suggested "ages ago", nothing's
automatically enforceable - I definitely agree with using subject lines
that start with [OT] (exact string there, nothing else), for anything
OT, so filters will work;  The other thing is that we've all seen
subject lines set up like this:
  [OT] Subject matter (way OT) (long)

Personally, I'd like it a lot if we didn't suffer from terminal Subject
Line retro-editing, as it can make it really hard to read all of every
thread in some sort of coherent manner (i.e. it tends to shatter the
thread so badly that nothing makes sense <G>) - If we all do things
consistently & try to keep with the "Principle of least astonishment",
it'd be good, methinks!  Definitely good to change subject lines if
you're picking up a new, different subject (Usually, people put in a
"Was: Old Subject" pointer to the old subject, to help people figure out
what's up there.)

Some other comments one user passed to me that I'll also mention (picked
off another list, so the subject line's aren't PIC-related.);

   1) ALWAYS put topic keywords at the beginning of the Subject line
      followed by a colon (:) (e.g. "9X,NT: Helper DLLs"). If you
      don't, it's likely that no one will read your message.

  (Well, we don't have keywords on this list, yet.)

   2) When including the message to which you are replying, instead of
      including the entire message, include only enough of the message
      to establish context.

  (Probably a VERY good idea;  I use <snipped> to indicate where I've
cut things short, but I find I get lost occasionally when someone
replies to something & I dunno what they're replying to.  Enough to
remind people what you're replying to, without so much that their inbox
overflows, is a good thing to consider <G>)

   3) Please keep your tag/signature lines short.  Only your name and
      E-mail address are necessary.  If folks want the rest, they can
      send you E-mail to get it.

  (Something to think about, it's not policy here, just don't way overdo
sig lines.)

  Mark

William K. Borsum wrote:
>
> Caisson suggested [OT](description) as a possible.  General idea was to
> have one or two consistent "keys" .
> None for anything truly pic related, another for technical but not
> necessarily pic related, and a third for anything not technical.  Keeps the
> filters to a minimum.  Adding a new filter every time someone comes up with
> a new (description) defeats the purpose.  Although adding a description to
> one of the three keys is not a bad idea--I think we call it the "subject"
>
> I think Adam has come up with a good working guideline--any way to adopt
> it, or something like it as "official" policy so we can be consistent?
> Kelly
>
> At 10:45 AM 8/18/99 -0400, you wrote:
> >I'm used to
> >
> >[OT] for things that the majority of the list would probably have an interest
> >in, but don't apply directly to the 'charter' of the list
> >
> >[WOT] for things which have spurred off of another thread, which many in the
> >list are participating in, but are not even related to anything close to the
> >list charter.
> >
> >A new thread would never start out [wot], but could start out [ot].  If
> only two
> >people are still participating in a [wot] topic, they should continue
> privately,
> >but if several are participating then there shouldn't be a problem with
> allowing
> >this forum for it - as long as it doesn't go for _too_ long...
> >
> >-Adam
>
> >> Greetings all:
> >> Just wanted to toss an idea out and see if anyone salutes:
> >>
> >> [OT] is used, in theory, to identify things that are "Off Topic" for this
> >> list.  As has been pointed out, there are OT topics that are technical and
> >> pertinent to the list in one way or another, and other topics that are
> >> truly non-technical.
> >>
> >> How about [TOT] or some such for "Technical, but Off Topic" and [NOT] for
> >> "Not Technical, and way Off Topic"?
> >>
> >> Would let all of us set our filters with a reasonable chance of getting the
> >> good technical OT stuff like the discussion on SMD soldering techniques.
> >>
> >> Kelly
> >>
> >>
> ****************************************************************************
> >> ********
> >> All legitimate attachments to this email will be clearly identified in the
> >> text.
> >> William K. Borsum, P.E.
> >> OEM Dataloggers and Instrumentation Systems
> >> <borsum@dascor.com> & <www.dascor.com>
> >
> >
> ****************************************************************************
> ********
> All legitimate attachments to this email will be clearly identified in the
> text.
> William K. Borsum, P.E.
> OEM Dataloggers and Instrumentation Systems
> <borsum@dascor.com> & <www.dascor.com>