<clip>
... (ii) look for the word "wirt" in the body of the text.
<clip>
LOL....I too am very busy but don't mind the occassional OT. In fact, it wasn't
until Larry Barnes responded to this thread that I just shrugged my shoulders to
see what all the stink is about. After all, I must have already deleted 20 - 30
on this thread so far.... and even while I respond to this one 3 more popped up
on this thread... sheeesh

>>> Wirt Atmar <[log in to unmask]> 04/03 3:40 PM >>>
John writes:

> I must agree with Michael.  Sure, there are many of us who are interested in
>  debates on politics, religion, whether the moon landings were hoaxes, etc.
>  I'm also sure there are discussion areas somewhere for those topics.  This
>  list is allegedly an HP3000 list.  Most of us who subscribe to this list
>  receive the postings while we are at work, and most of us have plenty of
>  work to do.  I have dropped out of the list a few times, because the drain
>  on my time was simply unmanageable.  Please, let's try to keep the volume
of
>  off-topic stuff reasonable. I agree with Cortlandt that a list of standard
>  prefixes, while never adequate to cover all situations, would be helpful
for
>  both filtering and archive searches.

While this particular thread shouldn't have been the cause of discomfort to
anyone because it clearly bore the OT: notation in its subject headers, I
can't imagine anyone ever truly typing in any one of the multitude of headers
that Jeff earlier suggested. Most subjects lapse over in a dozen different
topics at any one time, even if they are completely "on-topic." Further,
things tend to be either quite on-topic, or they're not.

If someone wants to filter out most of the noise, I think there is a
relatively simple rule that could be imposed in anyone's email filter: (i)
seek out the phrase OT: in the subject line, and/or (ii) look for the word
"wirt" in the body of the text. I think you'd get rid of virtually all of the
trash in one fell swoop. I know that's the rule I use.

Wirt Atmar