I know this is old, but I just got back from Sicily... so here goes. * Scott Schultz <scott at cjhunter.com> [2005-03-15 17:22 +0100]: > >Subject is not the best thing to use for sorting the messages into > >separate folders. You should use the List-Id: header. > > If my email client allowed me to sort on random headers I'd certainly > do that. Alas, it's an imperfect world and what's correct seldom > coincides with what's practical. It is possible to sort based on message headers in Outlook 2002/XP. Start with a blank rule, make the rule apply to messages as they arrive, and then use the rule labeled, "with specific words in the message header" (where 'specific words' is underlined). Then you could add (for this list): List-ID: Dragera discussion from dragaera.info <dragaera.dragaera.info> That's similar to how I used to do things with Outlook 2000. According to my wife's computer 2002 isn't so different. > As for sorting based on the To: field, I already do this. If it was > sufficient, well, I wouldn't have made the original request. No > solution involving headers is going to catch off-list replies and > these happen frequently given that the list messages use the sender's > email address as the Reply-To header. Actually, any solution involving the 'In-Reply-To' and 'References' headers, when the email was generated by a well-behaved email client, would work (and does work) quite well. My biggest problem with adding something to the Subject field is that different email clients deal with adding the 'Re:' in different ways. Some add before the added text, some after, and you end up with broken threads, because often those same email clients don't properly use the In-Reply-To or References headers. Grrr. > If it's a religious issue then there's little point in discussing it. > I'm sure the list owners have their reasons for wanting things a > certain way. Pie Iesu domine, dona eis requiem. [bonk] What? Of course it's not a religious issue! Excuse me... Pie Iesu domine,... [bonk] ...dona eis requiem. [bonk] ;] Regards, -- dave [ please don't CC me ]