On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 12:35:38 at 12:35:38PM -0600, David W. Tamkin
(dattier(_at_)panix(_dot_)com) wrote:
Tyler listed pros and cons to both, and among the advantages of web-based
fora, he included,
C> 1. Your inbox doesn't get clobbered by list traffic.
That's what digest mode is intended to relieve.
I must be particularly thick on this, but I have never been able to
see the point of digest mode, and of the assertion above.
As far as I understand, digests are not compressed, or are they?
If a list generates one message per day, I'll have to read one
message per day. If it generates 100, I'll have to read 100,
regardless if they show as "one message" or "100 messages" in the
mailbox.
So, what is the gain? I'm just sincerely curious, not trying to make
fun of anybody. Are there ISPs that shut down accounts receiving more
than X messages per day (if limited, it would make more sense to to
limit them on bandwidth, right?) Or maybe for some people seeing "1
message, 10000 lines long" is less overwhelming than "100 messages,
each 100 lines long"?
With 100 different messages, skipping without reading the 95
uninteresting ones is much faster than in digest mode, isn't it?
(not to mention the fact that digest mode facilitates one of the most
irritating, time wasting problems on mailing lists, unless the
digest subscriber is really disciplined: the lists gets *very* long
messages with ***totally*** uninformative subjects and content 95%
irrelevant)
What do you think?
Ciao,
Marco Fioretti
--
Marco Fioretti m.fioretti, at the server inwind.it
Red Hat for low memory http://www.rule-project.org/en/
In a hundred years from now it will not matter what my bank account
was, the type of house I lived in, or the kinds of clothes I wore, but
the world may be much different because I was important in the life of
a child Author unknown
_______________________________________________
procmail mailing list
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail