Re: lengthy mailings

kerry miller (astingsh@ksuvm.ksu.edu)
Mon, 9 Sep 1991 19:08:00 CDT


Twenty lines seems a bit harsh, since the first ten or twelve are the
header. But I agree, and by way of 'synopsis' why should the subjectline
bw held so sacrosanct that we have to have an exchange of messages before
agreeing to change it? Theres 80 characters or so that could serve very well
to indicate what one's topic is.

[ This message came in a little over a week ago, when I was out of town.
It was sent to "NativeNet," rather than to "nn.general" - which is why
it has languished around so long. Anyway, I'd like to just add my two
cents worth to this discussion by saying that, as facilitator, I agree
that it is useful to use subject lines that are as descriptive as pos-
sible of the content of your articles. However, if you're replying to
an existing discussion thread, please avoid the temptation to change
the subject line unless you see yourself going off in a completely new
direction, since it's important to keep this line identical so that the
IGC/APC system will not see it as unrelated to articles already on file
and thus open up a new topic for it.

Also, I've been known to change subject lines when I feel they are not
properly descriptive. However, I'd prefer if posters of articles would
put some thought into the subject (line) themselves. Thanks! --Gary ]