On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 12:53:05PM -0600, David Champion [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > On 2002.01.07, in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > "Benjamin Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Gary Johnson [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > > > - there's just too much noise > > > > > > I don't know what to do about that, except to post less often myself. > > > > And, ironically, he mailed the list to tell us why he's unsubscribing > > instead of just unsubscribing. =) > > I don't think it's ironic, just excusably off-topic. But it's true, and
Especially considering that it's one of the Mutt "old guard" saying it. > it needed to be said sometime. I've considered unsubscribing a number > of times, myself, but I'm not quite to that point yet. However, when > my 550-600 messages per day finally gets to be too much, which list > will fall off first? That's right, the one with 50-75 messages per day, > seemingly a third of which are social in nature, or questions about vim > or other software that is not mutt. > > Indicating that a problem exists hardly comprises noise in itself. I > expect this will be my only complaint on the subject, but I've long felt > that the issue deserved a little attention. <aol>me too</aol> I guess it's nice that Mutt is getting so much use these days, but a lot of the traffic does seem to be... well, noise. I admit I have a hard time keeping www.mutt.org's user sections as current as I should at least partially because of the fact that following this list very closely is a formidable task. Though, to be blunt, a more current FAQ would probably help a lot in keeping the traffic down. If anyone wanted to try their hand at it and did a very good job I would certainly link to it.
msg22497/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
