breaking the threads...

[Dave Woyciesjes]

On 03/14/2012 03:13 PM, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 17:38, Dave Woyciesjes<woyciesjes at sbcglobal.net>  wrote:
>> On 03/14/2012 11:50 AM, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>>> Am 14.03.2012 16:38 schrieb "Dave Woyciesjes"<woyciesjes at sbcglobal.net
>>> <mailto:woyciesjes at sbcglobal.net>>:
>>>
>>>   >
>>>   >  On 03/14/2012 10:59 AM, Alexander Skwar (ML) wrote:
>>>   >>
>>>   >>  Am 14.03.2012 15:52, schrieb Robert P. J. Day:
>>>   >>>
>>>   >>>  On Wed, 14 Mar 2012, M.R. wrote:
>>>   >>>
>>>   >>>>  However, I *will change* my usage of the subject line if told so by
>>>   >>>>  the list owner/moderator, or if another participant points me to
>>>   >>>>  where the list owner has a documented directive that the subject
>>>   >>>>  lines must not be changed inside a thread. (This would be the only
>>>   >>>>  list with such rule I'm aware of, but I guess that's what a list
>>>   >>>>  owner has the right to do).
>>>   >>>>
>>>   >>>>  M.R.
>>>   >>>
>>>   >>>
>>>   >>>  first, you need to get out more often as everyone else is correct
>>>   >>>  and you are wrong.
>>>   >>
>>>   >>
>>>   >>  Actually, that's not a correct statement. At least Liam and Basil
>>>   >>  are on a wrong track.
>>>   >
>>>   >
>>>   >          Really? Where&  how?
>>>
>>> You know perfectly well where.
>>
>>
>>         No, I don't. That's why I'm asking.
>
> Sure.
>
>>>   >>>  second, and more critically, you seem to be taking an amazingly
>>>   >>>  obstinate position on something that would be trivially easy to
>>>   >>>  change. all people are asking you to do is use a new message to start
>>>   >>>  a new thread.
>>>   >>
>>>   >>
>>>   >>  But, if you have a look, he didn't start a new thread! The subject
>>>   >>  line is supposed to be a brief "overview" of what's in the mail.
>>>   >>  If the topic (or, maybe we might even call it "subject") changes,
>>>   >>  it's correct to change the subject contents.
>>>   >
>>>   >
>>>   >          No, the correct method is: If you are wanting to reply to a
>>>   >  message in a thread, and your reply is taking the discussion to a new
>>>   >  direction necessitating a Subject line change; then the polite&  proper
>>>   >  this to do is open a new message window, copy the body contents of what
>>>   >  you are replying to, paste in to the new message window. Then add your
>>>   >  reply&  send.
>>>
>>> No, that is not correct.
>>>
>>> Correct procedure: Change the subject line, but do not produce a new
>>> mail. This way, the threading stays intact. After all, the changed mail
>>> used to have to do something with the previous mail.
>>
>>
>>         The point of threading is to group messages that relate to a specific
>> subject. Yes, the changed _used_ to have something to do with the original,
>> but the key word/phrase there is 'used to'.
>
> Yep, "used to" is the key. That's why it's correct to change the
> subject and that's why MUAs keep the threading intact, by not
> removing the headers used for threading (In-Reply-To and/or
> References).
>

	So, then, pray tell, if a new message used to have something to do with 
a specific thread, but no longer does; Why would you want them to be 
connected?

>>         Why would you want a message about KDE in your grouping of messages
>> about Acrobat?
>
> If it relates, then that's exactly the reason.

	If it relates, then the Subject shouldn't (need) to be changed.

>>> The way you suggested makes sure that threading brakes, which is bad.
>>
>>
>>         Sounds like you have an uncommon definition of threading.
>
> If *you* say so…

	And just about everyone else here.

>>>   >>  What confuses me - why this "hate"? He's not doing anything
>>>   >>  wrong! On the contrary, he's completely right!
>>>   >>
>>>   >>  Alexander
>>>   >
>>>   >
>>>   >          Hate? I see no hate. Just people asking someone to follow the
>>> group's guidelines; and follow common&  long standing list-serve
>>> etiquette.
>>>
>>> Hate was the wrong word.
>>
>>
>>         I didn't think that's the word you really wanted.
>
> Correct. I really do blame it on the fact, that english
> isn't my mother tongue.

	International communication over text-based medium is always 'fun'.

>>> Point is: people complain, although Mr follows common&  long standing
>>> list-serve etiquette. People even suggest to break this etiquette.
>>
>>
>>         Hmmm, now this _is curious. You&  MR say he is following the common
>> etiquette; yet pretty much everyone else here says our method is following
>> the common etiquette....
>
> Indeed. This _is_ curious. Please also keep in mind, how
> the mail clients actually act. They do *not* remove the
> "threading headers". Especially for that reason.

	Yes, I've known for a while now that mail clients don't remove 
threading info. That's the whole reason behind the idea of starting a 
new thread for a different topic.

>>> Quite simple: if the subject of a sub-thread changes, then change the
>>> subject line. But do Not start a new thread!
>>
>>
>>         So, you're saying that this whole mailing list, and any messages
>> coming after this; should all be part of one thread?
>
> If they relate to this thread - why, yes, of course!
>
>>> He seems to follow this old rule. So please stop moaning.
>>
>>         If you want to bolster your side of this argument, please provide
>> everyone with references to articles&  such (hopefully they will have
>> dates).
>>         The only way to win an argument like this is to provide irrefutable
>> proof that you are correct.
>
> Like you provided arguments… Up to now, you haven't provided
> any proof either. I can just refer to how mailing lists always used
> to behave, or, rather, what's the common way of dealing with this
> "issue" was. It contradicts to what you seem to assume to be the
> common way.
>

	Yes, your are correct, I haven't provided any links about how this 
should be done. I will look for some.
	In the meantime, you have yet to do the same.


Is this what banging your head on a brick wall feels like?

-- 
--- Dave Woyciesjes
--- ICQ# 905818
--- AIM - woyciesjes
--- CompTIA A+ Certified IT Tech - http://certification.comptia.org/
--- HDI Certified Support Center Analyst - http://www.ThinkHDI.com/
             Registered Linux user number 464583

"Computers have lots of memory but no imagination."
"The problem with troubleshooting is that trouble shoots back."
  - from some guy on the internet.