Warn if no subject: What do we say?

[kander]

Jeremy just said in the other 'warning if no subject' thread that he'd rather leave this out.

David says it's a 'basic functionality'. I happen to agree with David, but just to gauge the opinion around here: Who thinks what and why?

--K

[sjk]

I set the "Warn if no Subject when Sending" preference in Mulberry because I believe it's good etiquette for the majority of e-mail to have a subject header.

Can you think of any mail clients that don't [i]display[/] subject headers (by default)? That alone is a strong indication that it's considered important enough that the sender might want to include one for the benefit of recipients.

Messages without subject headers can end up becoming part of the same thread in clients that support threading.

[Ladrillo]

I personally don´t like that kind of reminders, and I don´t see the necessity. If implemented, I would like it to be an option.

I can imagine forgeting to write the subject on a casual mail, but it´s not likely to happen when composing important "bussiness" mails. When composing an important mail, people usually double-check the spelling, format, signature, correct personality, all that. I don´t think many people forget to write a subject in this case. And if its casual mail we´re talking, I believe it doesn´t really matter.

[redmyrlin]

Originally posted by kander
Jeremy just said in the other 'warning if no subject' thread that he'd rather leave this out.

David says it's a 'basic functionality'. I happen to agree with David, but just to gauge the opinion around here: Who thinks what and why?

--K

I have to agree with you on this one. I don't like receiving subjectless emails and would be mortified if I sent such an abomination. With my memory I'll take all the helpful warnings I can get!

[fmnewbee]

we are all very individual so if it is an option that would serve more peopel than if it is a deafult or not implemented at all.

I see much merit in having it as an option. I miss it at times and people tend to react to such laziness or carelessnes. The y thing it is kind of not considerate beahvior to send a blank subject line On yahoo I have deleted such emails if I didn't remember the sender wel lenough to trust him or her.

Trew

[gdg]

Like having links open in a new window, just in case you're in IE and not a tabbed browser, this should be an option.

[sjk]

Originally posted by Ladrillo
And if its casual mail we´re talking, I believe it doesn´t really matter.

Maybe it doesn't matter to the sender, but the subject can be a potentially useful visual cue to the recipient for quickly locating specific messages. For example, archived messages without subjects are likely to require viewing to remember their content. Even when the subject is "inaccurate" is can still be an effective clue to what the message contains.

I think it's a bit "selfish" and "lazy" of senders not to add subjects to their messages if they think they're important enough to send to me in the first place. Even if it's not true that's the first impression I get when someone sends me a message without a subject.

It's yet another example of the increasing amount of sender-centric behavior with e-mail communication. Spam is typically a burden on recipients. Large attachments can be a burden on recipients. And even something as innocent as messages without subjects can make it a bit harder for recipients, whether or not senders realize it.

[Ladrillo]

Senders are usually also recipients

I agree that subjectless emails are annoying, but I just don´t think the system (FM) should compensate the lazyness of senders, and anyway the whole idea is intended (I believe) to help in case you forget to write a subject...

I dunno. Just thinking out loud here.

[sjk]

So, make it an optional warning and be done with it. The anti-subject rebels can disable it, the more polite amongst us might enable it.

I'll have a good laugh if I see this topic re-emerge a year from now.

[David]

Originally posted by Ladrillo
Senders are usually also recipients

I agree that subjectless emails are annoying, but I just don´t think the system (FM) should compensate the lazyness of senders

It is not always the laziness of senders Ladrillo. A couple of weeks ago for example. An email I was sending was especially important (so I took a long time to get it right) much more time than what I usually spend when composing email. And then I hit the send button on an empty subject header..... It wasn't because I was lazy that I left the subject header blank...... It was because I had decided that I would add the subject later (I could not think of a good subject before I started to write) The mail took me so long to compose that I just plain forgot. To add this option to "Account Preferences" would not affect the user inteface at all (or affect users who do not want this feature) It could just be another radio box to select (maybe positioned next to where it says "view html") with the text "warn if no subject"

[SusanUKF]

I chose : "Make it an option"... I personally like it, but if it gets on some people's nerves, then making it an option should solve the problem.

That way, everyone is happy, right?

Susan.

[sjk]

Originally posted by David
It wasn't because I was lazy that I left the subject header blank...... It was because I had decided that I would add the subject later (I could not think of a good subject before I started to write) The mail took me so long to compose that I just plain forgot.

Great example. That happens to me once in awhile and I appreciate the warning. Since it so infrequent it's useful rather than annoying.

Apparently folks who'd find such a warning a nuisance are those who compose subjectless messages more frequently. I prefer not being a recipient of those messages, especially when I know the sender could have been reminded. Subjects on e-mail seem like fair and undemanding netiquette to me.

[redmyrlin]

Originally posted by sjk
....Subjects on e-mail seem like fair and undemanding netiquette to me.

I would even go so far as to say that with today's torrent of email from work, friends, interests, mailing lists, and unfortunately spam, the use of a meaningful subject is essential to good netiquette.

[Ladrillo]

Apparently folks who'd find such a warning a nuisance are those who compose subjectless messages more frequently

That is not true in my case. And anyway, how would you know? Unless you´re Charles Xavier or something
OK, David´s example is good, and I have to admit that you guys may be right about adding this feature as an option.

It´s just that I hate those warnings.

"Want to save changes?" "Are you sure you want to unhide hidden files and folders?" Want to submit this error log to X?" "Are you free tonight?" etc etc etc.

[Smithy]

Originally posted by Ladrillo
That is not true in my case.

Then the warning message should not bother you at all as you won't see those messages anyway.