On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 07:05:34AM EST, David Beverly wrote: > On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 02:05:32AM -0500, David Yitzchak Cohen wrote: > > Think of it this way: my posts serve as a wakeup call to those who > > haven't yet decided to learn how to use Mutt properly. They must > > learn to either ignore me, or to filter out my headers. Much good > > comes from the latter, and the former can't hurt. > > Ignoring the extraneous and self-indulgent 2K+ of X-headers is certainly > a no-brainer in mutt, but those thousands of bytes still have to be > downloaded before they can be ignored. There are still plenty of people > out there with metered 'Net access. I just checked: not counting the X-Mutt-Ignore-Me-Pattern: header: $ LC_ALL=C du -sh ~/.mutt/default_headers 4.0K /home/dave/.mutt/default_headers In other words, an otherwise-500-byte message turns into a 4.5K message. (Since the last time somebody's complained, the amount of crap I dump in the headers has skyrocketed.) You win. I'm going to start rotating headers around on mailing list posts, so nobody has to download all my headers for every single message I send. I hope to put together the mechanism this afternoon. Until then, leaving my setup as-is won't do much more damage. > Moving an obscenely huge and pointless .sig into the headers to avoid > censure for ignoring basic netiquette isn't really as clever as you seem > to think, As you can probably guess, that's your opinion, not mine ;-P > and hardly counts as a wakeup call to anyone for anything. Until you can explain _why_ that statement makes any sense, I have no reason to believe it. > Affected cleverness, while certainly self-serving, rarely serves as > anything of value. I'm not much of a fan of nonobvious statements without explanations :-( - Dave -- Uncle Cosmo, why do they call this a word processor? It's simple, Skyler. You've seen what food processors do to food, right? Please visit this link: http://rotter.net/israel
Attachment:
pgppZbx17bvSW.pgp
Description: PGP signature