Searching \ for '[OT] Having a proper treaded discussion or how to' 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/index.htm?key=having+proper+treaded
Search entire site for: 'Having a proper treaded discussion or how to'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] Having a proper treaded discussion or how to '
2005\05\09@175620 by Matthew Miller

flavicon
face
part 1 961 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset=us-asciiHi everyone,

This message is to ask everyone here to use their mail reader properly. My
mail reader shows messages in a threaded way (see the atteached image). Some
folks, instead of creating a new message for a new topic, will be reading a
message, hit "reply to" and then change the subject line to something
new. The attached image shows this happening twice in one thread.

I ask that people not do this because it really helps your message be
answered if it appears with the newest messages, and not among the messages
of a thread that is five days old. Please consider this! Since this is OT
I'm keeping it short. ;^) Thanks for your time.

Matthew.

--
If I don't drive around the park,
I'm pretty sure to make my mark.
If I'm in bed each night by ten,
I may get back my looks again.
If I abstain from fun and such,
I'll probably amount to much;
But I shall stay the way I am,
Because I do not give a damn.
               -- Dorothy Parker


part 2 5241 bytes content-type:image/png (decode)


part 3 35 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
(decoded 7bit)

2005\05\09@194939 by John Hansen

picon face
I'm one of the people who does this.  Up until your message, I didn't
realize that this caused a problem.  I guess I was under the impression
that threads were defined by the subject and if the subject changed, it
would be interpretted as a new thread.  If this is not the case, what
field is keyed on to determine whether something is a thread or not?

John Hansen


Matthew Miller wrote:

{Quote hidden}

2005\05\10@034136 by jens persson

flavicon
Hi all,
Matthew Miller wrote:

>On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 07:49:42PM -0400, John Hansen wrote:
>
>>I'm one of the people who does this.  Up until your message, I didn't
>>realize that this caused a problem.  I guess I was under the impression
>>that threads were defined by the subject and if the subject changed, it
>>would be interpretted as a new thread.  If this is not the case, what
>>field is keyed on to determine whether something is a thread or not?
>>
>
>It is the In-Reply-To field. For this message the field is:
>In-Reply-To: <spam_OUT427FF716.1020907TakeThisOuTspamfredonia.edu>
>
>The value of this field is supposed to be a globally unique id generated by
>your mail reader. If a mail reader groups messages only by subject then
>there is no way to tell who responded to whom (and thus can't display the
>messages in a threaded view), the In-Reply-To field gets around this
>problem.
>
<nitpick>
It's not quite that easy, you have to take References headers into the picture (and free form In-Reply-To from RFC 822).
For a full dissection of a good threading algorithm (there are some small things to tune, like Swedish MS lookout using SV: instead of Re: when answering by default) please read jwz's essay:
http://www.jwz.org/doc/threading.html
<\nitpick>

Make good things
/jp

--  jens persson         #          Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the
<.....jensKILLspamspam@spam@persson.cx>    #                                    semicolon.
Mäster Olofsväg 24   #                   -- Epigrams in Programming,
S-224 66 LUND;SWEDEN #                        ACM SIGPLAN Sept. 1982

2005\05\10@125619 by PicDude

flavicon
face
The "Message-Id" field is used to identify & thread messages.  This is why on
email discussion groups, you should not start a new thread by replying to
another message and changing the subject, text, etc, as threaded mail readers
will put it as part of the original thread.

Cheers,
-Neil.


On Tuesday 10 May 2005 03:10 am, Alan B. Pearce scribbled:
> >I'm one of the people who does this.  Up until your message, I didn't
> >realize that this caused a problem.  I guess I was under the impression
> >that threads were defined by the subject and if the subject changed, it
> >would be interpretted as a new thread.  If this is not the case, what
> >field is keyed on to determine whether something is a thread or not?
>
> So am I, and wondering the same thing.


2005\05\10@131447 by Bob Blick

face picon face
> The "Message-Id" field is used to identify & thread messages.  This is why
> on
> email discussion groups, you should not start a new thread by replying to
> another message and changing the subject, text, etc, as threaded mail
> readers
> will put it as part of the original thread.

That seems like a skill learnable by almost half the population. Too bad
there isn't a transparent way to do it correctly, because although I will
try to do it correctly from now on, the spectrum of readers is pretty
varied. Most people don't want to pull out a (mental)checklist each time
they send an email.

Cheerful regards,

Bob


2005\05\10@142645 by Martin McCormick

flavicon
face
Richard.Prosser@Powerware.com quotes and then writes:
>> would be interpretted as a new thread.  If this is not the case, what
>> field is keyed on to determine whether something is a thread or not?
>
>It is the In-Reply-To field. For this message the field is:
>In-Reply-To: <427FF716.1020907spamKILLspamfredonia.edu>
>
>The value of this field is supposed to be a globally unique id generated by
>your mail reader. If a mail reader groups messages only by subject then
>there is no way to tell who responded to whom (and thus can't display the
>messages in a threaded view), the In-Reply-To field gets around this
>problem.

       This is very interesting.  I also assumed it was the subject
that determined the thread.  I have thrown away that line for years
when replying to messages because I thought it was of very little
value except maybe for trouble-shooting like many other headers are
useful for.  I guess I'll put it back from now on.

Martin McCormick WB5AGZ  Stillwater, OK
OSU Information Technology Division Network Operations Group

2005\05\10@153952 by James Newtons Massmind

face picon face
If that line is found, in the archive at piclist.com, there is a link that
takes you to the original message. But the archive uses the subject to build
the thread. It also uses the time the post reached the server at mit.edu to
sort the messages, rather than the time it was received at piclist.com or
the time it was sent, etc... so they just about always come out in the right
order. The In-Reply-To: is much too unreliable. Quite often it is removed,
incorrect, or just never inserted in the first place.

---
James.



> {Original Message removed}

2005\05\11@144658 by Martin McCormick

flavicon
face
"James Newtons Massmind" writes:
>The In-Reply-To: is much too unreliable. Quite often it is removed,
>incorrect, or just never inserted in the first place.

       I use nmh which is an old but very powerful UNIX user agent.
I can either put the In-Reply-To: header in as it is here or leave it
out by modifying the reply composition filter file.  The reason I have
always left it out was because I don't like to put any more headers in
replies than absolutely necessary.  I am sure many people hate to see
messages with tons of headers and 1 little line at the bottom of
actual informational content.  So, if it is of little value, I will
leave it out as I mostly always have.  What are the thoughts by those
who hopefully know more than I do about this topic?

Martin McCormick WB5AGZ  Stillwater, OK
OSU Information Technology Division Network Operations Group

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2005 , 2006 only
- Today
- New search...