On Sun, 2022-09-18 at 11:46 +0200, Reto wrote: > > For example, if you have got a virtual search folder with a filter, that > > searches the email bodies for "x11" in folders for different mailing > > lists, it can be very helpful, if the subject lines mention "[arch- > > general] ", "[Alsa-user] ", "[Evolution] ", "[lubuntu-users] " etc. to > > get a first overview. > > Filter on the List-Id: header, that's what it is meant for. > Any email that arrives in your inbox from the list, also has the list > address on its recipient list, so it's easy enough to filter based on > that as well if you don't have a MUA that can read headers. Hi, it's Ok, if there are valid reasons to remove the identifier from the subject to keep this DKIM thingy intact, but please don't try to explain how to filter. First of all you hide an important part, by partial quoting: "For several reasons such an identifier can be useful. For each of those reasons somebody probably has got an objection, how to do things different, so that the identifier is unneeded. Yes, it's not needed, but it's useful/helpful for some people, in some cases, while there's unlikely a good reason to be annoyed by " "." If the filter criteria should be "x11" and an overview is wanted, but not a separation by mailing lists, it makes a difference. Now you can argue that still the "To" header can provide this overview, even without filtering/separating by mailing list and I can argue against it, that the subject could show the mailing list + an important headline in one and so on... If the identifier in the subject is that unneeded and useless and can be replaced by something that is meant for something, then why was it used for such a long time, by so many mailing lists? IOW I accept it, if DKIM requires that the identifier must be dropped. But please don't pretend that it isn't a loss and using something else is anyway better. It is a loss, maybe not for you, but probably for other users, it's a loss, too. Regards, Ralf
