The set of emails that every member of a list wants to read is different, the only solution to make everyone happy would be to have one list per-email (or perhaps one list per-thread, if you are really optimistic and tolerant).
As an alternative one can setup filters or use the Delete button (or don't even bother to open threads you aren't interested in, if I read every single email posted to every single list I'm subscribed to it would take me more than 24/7 of email reading just to keep up). Peace uriel P.S.: Perhaps having chat@ for random crap and relegating dev@ for only technical discussions would work, but often it is hard to know where to draw the line, and two lists with very low traffic are really a waste of time. Really given the insanely low traffic levels in this list I don't see why people complains so much, have you ever been subscribed to lkml or any other high volume list? <off-topic-rant>I'm starting to suspect that all the stupid web forums and shit have created a whole generation of users that don't even know how to deal with email (recently somebody posted to the xiph list unsure of how mailing lists worked and asking why they didn't use a web forum instead, a few weeks back some moron posted to reddit asking about all this stupid open source projects that used this dumb mailing list technology instead of web forums. *sigh*</off-topic-rant> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Jeremy Jay<dinkuma...@gmail.com> wrote: > As much as I love dwm and suckless projects in general, I could really > do without all the off-topic conversations by the same 10 people. If > there will not be split suckless-dev/suckless-discussion lists I will be > unsubscribing. I hate to miss all the good code and patches, but I also > hate dealing with the other 90% of the emails and their associated egos. > I'm sure there are others listening who agree. > > Before anyone says to just add a filter, I do not have any filters set > up (other than spam), to me the point of getting the emails is to READ > them so if I do not want to read them, then I should not be subscribed > in the first place. > > Jeremy > >
