Searching \ for '[Admin] piclist thread ordering' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/microchip/devices.htm?key=pic
Search entire site for: 'piclist thread ordering'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[Admin] piclist thread ordering'
2000\04\30@135557 by Dan Michaels

flavicon
face
I've looked at some of the threads on the piclist "website",
and noticed lots of times individual responses are very much
out of order, by as much as 2-3 days. So, if you follow down
thru a thread by clicking on "next in thread", you often go
all over the place. Am wondering why this is so ???????

2000\04\30@183202 by ssemjaco

picon face
I think tihs is due to a number of reasons:

#1 e-mails get their timestamp when you hit the send button in the e-mail editor, not when you actually send it. So, if you type your responds when you recive your e-mail but doesn't actually send it till you check for e-mail next time then your timestamp will be different from the time the server gets the e-mail.

#2 Timezones. This list has got members all over the world, so the time will be set different around the world.

#3 People don't set their computerclock


Regards
Stein Sem-Jacobsen
Norway

> I've looked at some of the threads on the piclist "website",
> and noticed lots of times individual responses are very much
> out of order, by as much as 2-3 days. So, if you follow down
> thru a thread by clicking on "next in thread", you often go
> all over the place. Am wondering why this is so ???????

2000\04\30@185458 by paulb

flavicon
face
Stein Sem-Jacobsen wrote:

> #1 e-mails get their timestamp when you hit the send button in the
> e-mail editor, not when you actually send it.

 Which is exactly as it should be.

 Everyone understands, or should, that not everyone received each reply
at the same time and so some replies *will* be made even though another
reply, not presently visible to the first respondent, has already
covered the territory.

> #2 Timezones. This list has got members all over the world, so the
> time will be set different around the world.

 Does not apply.  The time your browser indicates to you has been
corrected to your own timezone; same should apply to the archive.  The
message itself states the local time, *and* in which timezone that was.

> #3 People don't set their computerclock

 *And* timezone.  There's no answer to that one!
--
 Cheers,
       Paul B.

2000\04\30@190718 by Arthur

flavicon
face
And down to your provider  who delivers late mail *No First and 2nd Class
Stamp* needed.
My provider is having a bad time the amount of compliants they get.
Art
{Original Message removed}

2000\04\30@194115 by Dan Michaels
flavicon
face
Well, I know about timezones and datelines and clock settings
[mine is correct, BTW], but if you look at the following list
you'll see that somehow Paul Webster got his sunday posting into
the list above my own thursday posting, etc/etc.

And, I realize rank and education does have its privileges [and
that matters of privilege are taken *very* seriously troughout
the former British empire - and not that I am complaining about
this state of affairs], but still I was just wondering.

Maybe it's just *my* postings that are out of line [karma?].
=================

[OT] TRANSPUTERS WF (Thu Apr 27 2000 - 10:06:54 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS M. Adam Davis (Thu Apr 27 2000 - 11:35:09 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS WF (Thu Apr 27 2000 - 11:34:29 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS Dan Michaels (Thu Apr 27 2000 - 12:46:51 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS M. Adam Davis (Thu Apr 27 2000 - 13:04:43 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS WF (Thu Apr 27 2000 - 15:04:20 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS Wagner Lipnharski (Thu Apr 27 2000 - 19:12:42 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS WF (Fri Apr 28 2000 - 09:19:29 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS M. Adam Davis (Fri Apr 28 2000 - 10:04:35 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS WF (Fri Apr 28 2000 - 10:06:36 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS Paul B. Webster VK2BZC (Sun Apr 30 2000 - 01:55:40 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS Dan Michaels (Thu Apr 27 2000 - 23:19:10 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS WF (Fri Apr 28 2000 - 09:29:31 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS Alan B Pearce (Fri Apr 28 2000 - 00:50:19 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS Dan Michaels (Fri Apr 28 2000 - 07:50:33 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] PIC names..wasTRANSPUTERS Lance Allen (Sun Apr 30 2000 - 15:45:02
PDT)
ðRe: [OT] PIC names..wasTRANSPUTERS Dan Michaels (Sun Apr 30 2000 - 16:25:20
PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS Dipperstein, Michael (Fri Apr 28 2000 - 09:42:26 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS Alan B Pearce (Fri Apr 28 2000 - 09:51:06 PDT)
ðRe: [OT] TRANSPUTERS Dan Michaels (Fri Apr 28 2000 - 10:20:52 PDT)

2000\04\30@215442 by Mike Werner

picon face
On Sun, Apr 30, 2000 at 05:39:11PM -0600, Dan Michaels wrote:
> Well, I know about timezones and datelines and clock settings
> [mine is correct, BTW], but if you look at the following list
> you'll see that somehow Paul Webster got his sunday posting into
> the list above my own thursday posting, etc/etc.
>
> And, I realize rank and education does have its privileges [and
> that matters of privilege are taken *very* seriously troughout
> the former British empire - and not that I am complaining about
> this state of affairs], but still I was just wondering.
>
> Maybe it's just *my* postings that are out of line [karma?].

Nope.  What you are seeing is the effect of "threading".
Unfortunately, the way the archive presents its lists, the
threads are not very clear.  However, perhaps I can make it
clear through the following:
[WARNING - view this with a fixed-width font, or it probably ]
[          won't make the least bit of sense.                ]

2706     04/27 WF              (0.8K) [PICLIST] [OT] TRANSPUTERS
                                     |
2707     04/27 M. Adam Davis   (1.2K) |->
                                     | |
2708     04/27 WF              (1.5K) | |->
                                     |
2709     04/27 Dan Michaels    (0.7K) |*>
                                     | |
2710     04/27 M. Adam Davis   (0.2K) | |->
                                     | |
2711     04/27 WF              (0.9K) | |->
                                     |
2712     04/27 Wagner Lipnhars (1.8K) |->
                                     | |
2713     04/28 WF              (2.8K) | |->
                                     |   |
2714     04/28 M. Adam Davis   (0.3K) |   |->
                                     |   | |
2715     04/28 WF              (0.5K) |   | |->
                                     |   |
2716     04/30 Paul B. Webster (0.4K) |   |->
                                     |
2717     04/28 Dan Michaels    (0.5K) |*>
                                     | |
2718     04/28 WF              (0.8K) | |->
                                     |
2719     04/28 Alan B Pearce   (0.2K) |*>
                                     |
2720     04/28 Dan Michaels    (0.7K) |*>
                                     | |
2721     05/01 Lance Allen     (0.6K) | |->Re: [PICLIST] [OT] PIC names..wasTRANSPUTERS
                                     |   |
2722     04/30 Dan Michaels    (0.5K) |   |*>
                                     |
2723     04/28 Dipperstein, Mi (3.5K) |*>
                                     |
2724     04/28 Alan B Pearce   (0.1K) |*>
                                     |
2725     04/28 Dan Michaels    (1.2K) |*>

What I've done here is (try to, anyway) reproduce the way that
the thread goes together.  When a threading mail client sorts
out a batch of messages by thread it will look not only at what
the message's time stamp is, it will also look at what message, if
any, it is *replying* to.  Some email programs show this in a
graphical format - the one I use does.  And what I tried to
reproduce here is an ASCII art picture of the way that the
thread runs.  This is actually nothing more than a slightly
modified copy-and-paste out of the email client that I use.

And so, as you can see the reason that Paul Webster's message
came before yours was simply the result of the threading, and
not anything mysterious or karmic.
--
Mike Werner  KA8YSD           |  "Where do you want to go today?"
ICQ# 12934898                 |  "As far from Redmond as possible!"
'91 GS500E                    |
Morgantown WV                 |  Only dead fish go with the flow.


'[Admin] piclist thread ordering'
2000\05\01@002143 by Dan Michaels
flavicon
face
Mike Werner wrote:
..........
>What I've done here is (try to, anyway) reproduce the way that
>the thread goes together.  When a threading mail client sorts
>out a batch of messages by thread it will look not only at what
>the message's time stamp is, it will also look at what message, if
>any, it is *replying* to.  Some email programs show this in a
.........
>And so, as you can see the reason that Paul Webster's message
>came before yours was simply the result of the threading, and
>not anything mysterious or karmic.
>--

Thanks mucho grande, Mike, your diagram sorted it all out [no
pun intended]. So much for my new theory of the privileged
classes.

best regards,
- Dan Michaels

2000\05\01@083513 by Russell McMahon

picon face
>Well, I know about timezones and datelines and clock settings
>[mine is correct, BTW], but if you look at the following list
>you'll see that somehow Paul Webster got his sunday posting into
>the list above my own thursday posting, etc/etc.


I have even higher precedence than Paul.
My postings rate a 2 hour priority over his (along with all other NZ
PICListers).
The sun may never set on the British Empire but it shines here first :-)


     Russell McMahon
_____________________________

>From other worlds - http://www.easttimor.com
                               http://www.sudan.com

What can one man* do?
Help the hungry at no cost to yourself!
at  http://www.thehungersite.com/

(* - or woman, child or internet enabled intelligent entity :-))

2000\05\01@103050 by Dan Michaels

flavicon
face
Russell McMahon wrote:
>>Well, I know about timezones and datelines and clock settings
>>[mine is correct, BTW], but if you look at the following list
>>you'll see that somehow Paul Webster got his sunday posting into
>>the list above my own thursday posting, etc/etc.
>
>
>I have even higher precedence than Paul.
>My postings rate a 2 hour priority over his (along with all other NZ
>PICListers).
>The sun may never set on the British Empire but it shines here first :-)
>

Heh, heh, someone did catch my drift after all.

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2000 , 2001 only
- Today
- New search...