[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: '=>' as sender?

From: Thorsten Jolitz
Subject: Re: '=>' as sender?
Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 14:28:16 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.130002 (Ma Gnus v0.2) Emacs/24.0.93 (gnu/linux) (Adam Sjøgren) writes:

> On Thu, 03 May 2012 13:39:36 +0200, Thorsten wrote:
>> Tassilo Horn <> writes:
>>> That's intended and the reason is that you probably know your own first
>>> and last name, and thus some other display is more useful for own
>>> articles.
>> I don't really understand why anybody would want this.
> When shown in a group of only emails from a single mailinglist, it
> doesn't add much, agreed. But in, say, a list of emails you have sent,
> it can be nice.
>> Is it only me who sees that sender string, or everybody else too?
> It is only you who sees it that way, in Gnus, because you know your
> name. Everybody else sees your name.
> I.e. in my Summary buffer I see:
>   OA+        [  34: Thorsten Jolitz        ] 
>   O +            [  20: => gmane.emacs.gnus.use] 
> While you would see something like:
>   OA+        [  34: => gmane.emacs.gnus.use] 
>   O +            [  20: Adam Sjøgren           ] 
> The point is that in my nnml+archive:news-2012 I see a list like this:
>   O. [  17: => gmane.emacs.gnus.gen] Re: I can haz cloud idea
>   O. [  24: => gmane.discuss       ] Re: Expiring Gwene groups?
> Which is nicer than a long list of just [  n: Adam Sjøgren     ] all
> the way down.

Ok, I begin to understand the rationale. Then it makes sense, and I
    might well go back to the original configuration. I thought
    everybody else would see => gmane.emacs.gnus.use too, and thus
    ignore the message due to its anonimity. 

>> Isn't it much more informative to associate messages with sender
>> names?
> Yes, but you presumably know your own name quite well, so the space is
> used for something more informative _in Gnus' display_ [only].
>                                  o o o
> This often pops up as a question quite often, so I do begin to wonder if
> the default should be that this functionality be turned off.

I can confirm that it is very confusing for the non-initiated, but on
  the other hand seems to be well thought out (once initiation

Thanks for your answer.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]