On Aug 11, 2011, at 6:58 PM, Martin Rex wrote:
Richard Kulawiec wrote:
Let me start with a preamble: I think that those of us who choose
to "drink from the firehose" by subscribing to many mailing lists
List-Id: is only useful for folks who have either lots of time on
their hands, or want to use automatic archival and have no desire
to actually process the email they're receiving.
Not sure why this is. I sort by the list address in the to: or cc: fields, but
that's a limitation of my MTA.
Now, to the substance of what you've said:
I'm not surprised this presents difficulties: funneling all incoming
mail into one mailbox means that...all incoming mail is in one mailbox.
Yes, and that is the most efficient way to perform full processing.
I'm a simple human being that can focus his mind and his eyesight
only on one single thing at a time, so everything has to be serialized
anyway, and no amount of slicing and dicing the stuff will reduce
the amount of processing -- but most of it will incur additional actions
to open it when it is not queued in a single inbox.
I think the opposite. Suppose I'm subscribed to WebSec, TLS, PKIX and IETF.
There are different threads running in all 4 lists. I come to work in the
morning, and see that I have several messages on all lists. If I read them
one-by-one in one mailbox, I have to switch contexts for the different threads.
If they're sorted into four mailboxes, I can follow one thread, and then
another. MUAs can try to sort by thread, but occasionally fail (when people
change subjects, like "How to use MUAs (was: subject_prefix on IETF Discuss?)",
or when we get a "Re:" equivalent in some foreign language), so I prefer to see
them sorted by date rather than grouped by threads. I'd rather make less
context switches and just read mails from a single list grouped together, but
that's just me. You may have a different way of handing too much email.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf