[Mailman-Users] I'd prefer clients had collapsing features, not top-post; do away with mailing list digests

[David Benfell]

Quoting Tanstaafl <tanstaafl at libertytrek.org>:

> On 4/2/2015 1:45 PM, J.B. Nicholson-Owens <jbn at forestfield.org> wrote:
>> I also think we should stop offering mailing list digests, particularly
>> because I don't see a need for them now that bandwidth to most Internet
>> users is plentiful (plentiful enough to see widespread use of HTML
>> email, for instance) and so many users pick gratis email hosting that
>> imposes no quota on them (to maximize effectiveness of spying on
>> users?). I'd be willing to reconsider my opinion on digests if there
>> were some compelling reason(s) to continue digests. So far all I see in
>> digests are the bad points: digests break threading, replies to digests
>> contain far more quoted material than original material, and top posting
>> makes digests even harder for me to figure out what is being replied to.
>
> Well, liomited bandwidth was never a reason (in my mind) for wanting
> digest versions of some email lists...
>
> The main reason I may choose a digest version of a list is if it is
> high-volume, and/or I am more of a lurker than participant. In such a
> case digests makes the Inbox (or folder if they are filtered to one)
> less cluttered.

Agreed. I see some users choosing digest options even of relatively  
low volume lists that I host. I myself use the digest option for  
certain low priority lists that I want to get to, but not right away.
-- 
David Benfell <benfell at parts-unknown.org>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: PGP Digital Signature
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/mailman-users/attachments/20150402/0f0682b0/attachment.sig>