[Users] That won't work.

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 12:05:29 -0400, Little Girl wrote:
>Just out of curiosity, are those of you who use this sort of method
>creating just one folder for each sender and keeping all incoming
>and archived mail in it or are you creating separate folders for
>incoming and archived mail for each sender? I'm trying to decide
>which of the two would be most efficient and/or least likely to cause
>confusion or extra work.

Hi,

if you should rely much on thread view, it's probably better to use a
single folder in the first place. You could add a filter rule to
specially flag/tag new mails. If you check for new mails, than
temporarily sorting by number comes in useful.

I don't follow a rule for this. It depends and sometimes it even
depends on an unsubstantiated decision. I'm not using special measures
to handle new incoming mails. For general sorting I'm used to use tags
and to sort on demand. However, excessively using tags doesn't gain
much. IMO it's better to use not enough, than to use too many tags. I
didn't found a perfect solution for sorting data. Establishing order in
a cutlery tray is easy to do and even if something is in the wrong box,
it isn't a disaster. Sorting much data is an insoluble problem, since
our usage of the data might change. Set theory, intersection, links ...
however smart we try to solve this issue, we are condemned to fail.
IOW if you should find the perfect solution how to sort new incoming
mails, you'll much likely suffers from the short-blanket syndrome.
Sorting data is like beheading Hydra. If we solve one sorting issue, we
get two new sorting issues.

my 0,02€
Ralf