Category labels (was Re: Splitting c.l.py (was Re: ...))

[Terry Reedy]

In article <37E25EA9.A0BE7BF6 at callware.com>, ivanlan at callware.com says...

>Terry Reedy wrote:
>> 
>> Rather than splitting the group, what might be helpful are agreed-upon
>> 'designators' such as WIN, W95, WNT, UNX, TK consistently placed at the
>> head of subject lines when appropriate.
>> 
>...[splitting sucks]
>It might be helpful with the WIN, W95 etc. markers, but I belong to
>another mailing list in which such marking is enforced,

I once did also and intentially did not propose such.
'agreed-upon' == voluntary != official and enforced

> ... and what it does
>as far as I can tell is restrict what you think you can say to a set of
>pre-ordained categories.

I my experience, it also lead to less-than-useless flame fests.

>...  Then somebody comes in with something that
>doesn't fit in a box, so they dump the category markers, and get flamed.

My intention is that labels be used for topic areas that are too general to 
be shoved off to a sig or other specialized mailing list but which are 
specific (and off the main track) enough that many people would like to more 
easily skip them (perhaps automatically).

For instance, I *currently* read WIN and W95 posts but skip TK, UNiX, and 
WinNT topics when I can easily identify them -- and wish it were easier to do 
so.  

I did not intend that posts on the language and interpreter itself should be 
labeled.  Ditto for the first few posts or occasional posts on a new 
speciallized topic.  Only when there are enough to be bothersome to someone 
who does not want to see them.  (I would add MAC to the list above.)

Terry J. Reedy