Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!ncar!boulder!rsk
From: rsk@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Rich Kulawiec)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Tired of bogus subject lines?
Message-ID: <11521@boulder.Colorado.EDU>
Date: 10 Sep 89 21:39:50 GMT
References: <7921@medusa.cs.purdue.edu> <1650@unocss.UUCP> <11509@boulder.Colorado.EDU> <6115@ficc.uu.net>
Sender: news@boulder.Colorado.EDU
Reply-To: rsk@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Rich Kulawiec)
Organization: University of Colorado at Boulder
Lines: 19

In article <6115@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article <11509@boulder.Colorado.EDU>, rsk@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Rich Kulawiec) writes:
>> Actually, my solution to the problem is rather effective, too: modify
>> news 2.11 so that it silently discards non-compliant articles.
>
>This is also Evil and Rude. People have been using all sorts of weird
>reply formats (Re:, re:, Re^2:, Re^N:, etc...) for longer than NN has been
>around. Having NN automatically violate the RFC is uncool, but dumping NN
>generated messages is worse.

And this solution has been around longer, too; it predates NN by a long time.

I don't see how you can argue that it's "Evil and Rude" , unless you'd
like to assert that all sites are under some sort of obligation to pass
malformed articles, and/or that getting news 2.11 to enforce the RFC is
somehow unacceptable.

-- 
Rich Kulawiec, rsk@boulder.colorado.edu, boulder!rsk