Are you riffing T.S. Eliot's The Naming of Cats? If so, I approve. Best, Glenn -- PG&E Delenda Est Virus-free. www.avast.com

Divining intent is a perilous matter When multiple plausible meanings exist. Some people may just mean to clean up their chatter But just by pure chance they make others quite pissed. --

I think divining intent from semantics is a perilous business, in particular when there are multiple plausible intents. Some people may intend to start a new thread by changing the

Folks, If you change the subject line you probably intend to start a new thread. The problem is when you mail client changes the subject. In the past, but perhaps not on ”groups.io” I have

Malcolm Austen: Indeed. I thought the question was asked as to how messages can be threaded correctly if they have no subject line. I attempted to answer that in such a case they can be threaded

This has been hashed and rehashed an rerehashed in the past and the decision was made to thread topics based on subject line as well, because sometimes they were not threading correctly otherwise. I

Malcolm Austen: I argue the converse. If you want to start a new topic, you should compose a new message. It should be permissible to correct a typo in the subject line without starting a new

I disagree. If you change the subjectline, it's your intention to create a new thread. Also, I don't want to copy one of the worst parts of googlegroups: if you send a reply to a digest about subject

My point was not that it's a groups.io thing. My point was that there may have been no relationship established yet, so it doesn't seem appropriate to me to slap them on the wrist ("please don't send

I think even that is too much if a relationship has not yet been established. People DO send blank emails to subscribe, unsubscribe, etc. It's not standard practice or in any way required that all

Malcolm Austen: Yes Bruce, there are extra possibilities. The point I intended to make was that even if there is no subject line, messages can be correctly threaded by means of the email

This has been fixed. Cheers, Mark

Not always. See https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/wiki/6321 Bruce

Hi, If they can send emails then they should be able to enter a subject. That‘s not a groups.io thing really, that‘s just good behavior in email traffic. I think a rejection is appropriate. And if

Given the bouncing if sent via email, I feel even more strongly that owner messages without a subject should be allowed. These are potentially coming from people completely unfamiliar with the group

Emails are (or should be) threaded on the basis of the threading headers, not on the basis of the subject line. Malcolm. -- Malcolm Austen <malcolm.austen@...>

Yep...a source of annoyance for me. Topics are supposed to have subjects. Not sure how the threading algorithm is supposed to work without one. Regards, Bruce

Very good point.-- J Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones. My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

This would be for online submissions. If sent via email, the message is actually bounced with the message "500 This message is missing a subject. Please include a subject and send it again."

For those asking for clarification: It's not really that the message gets rejected in the usual sense, because it is not even allowed to be submitted without a subject. The composition box stops you