[gentoo-user] Don't start a new thread by changing the subject

[gentoo-user] Don't start a new thread by changing the subject

[kashani]

	I've noticed this a couple of times this week. A few of you have 
responded to the annoying Fortran thread, changed the subject, started a 
new message, and sent the email starting a new thread.

	Because you responded to an existing thread you are not creating a new 
thread and thus and reducing the size of the audience that reads your 
email. Specially I'd have responded to "open source monitoring on 
gentoo", but since I deleted the Fortran thread in its boring entirety I 
didn't even see it until I saw a response further down the chain today. 
Whoever started Fbsplash did the same thing.

kashani

Re: [gentoo-user] Don't start a new thread by changing the subject

[David W Noon]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 820 bytes --]

On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:12:26 -0700, kashani wrote about [gentoo-user]
Don't start a new thread by changing the subject:

> 	I've noticed this a couple of times this week. A few of you
> have responded to the annoying Fortran thread, changed the subject,
> started a new message, and sent the email starting a new thread.

You're a week or two behind the times.  The root cause of this was done
to death some time ago.  It is the bofh.it NNTP server that propagates
this mailing list through Usenet.  There is nothing we can do except
avoid using servers downstream from that rogue server.
-- 
Regards,

Dave  [RLU #314465]
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
dwnoon@ntlworld.com (David W Noon)
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Don't start a new thread by changing the subject

[kashani]

On 6/24/2011 5:09 PM, David W Noon wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:12:26 -0700, kashani wrote about [gentoo-user]
> Don't start a new thread by changing the subject:
>
>> 	I've noticed this a couple of times this week. A few of you
>> have responded to the annoying Fortran thread, changed the subject,
>> started a new message, and sent the email starting a new thread.
>
> You're a week or two behind the times.  The root cause of this was done
> to death some time ago.  It is the bofh.it NNTP server that propagates
> this mailing list through Usenet.  There is nothing we can do except
> avoid using servers downstream from that rogue server.

	My understanding is that the NNTP server was munging headers thereby 
creating new threads where it should have been a single thread. This is 
users responding to an existing email, removing all content, changing 
the subject, and then sending the mail which keeps the thread headers 
and make it appear to be part of the current thread. I see it all the 
time on the motorcycle lists where the average user is much less 
computer proficient.

kashani

Re: [gentoo-user] Don't start a new thread by changing the subject

[Dale]

kashani wrote:
> On 6/24/2011 5:09 PM, David W Noon wrote:
>> On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:12:26 -0700, kashani wrote about [gentoo-user]
>> Don't start a new thread by changing the subject:
>>
>>>     I've noticed this a couple of times this week. A few of you
>>> have responded to the annoying Fortran thread, changed the subject,
>>> started a new message, and sent the email starting a new thread.
>>
>> You're a week or two behind the times.  The root cause of this was done
>> to death some time ago.  It is the bofh.it NNTP server that propagates
>> this mailing list through Usenet.  There is nothing we can do except
>> avoid using servers downstream from that rogue server.
>
>     My understanding is that the NNTP server was munging headers 
> thereby creating new threads where it should have been a single 
> thread. This is users responding to an existing email, removing all 
> content, changing the subject, and then sending the mail which keeps 
> the thread headers and make it appear to be part of the current 
> thread. I see it all the time on the motorcycle lists where the 
> average user is much less computer proficient.
>
> kashani
>
>

Well, I don't see where anyone did that to the fortran thread here.  All 
posts have the same subject line.  Maybe something is wrong on your end?

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Don't start a new thread by changing the subject

[David W Noon]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1583 bytes --]

On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 17:43:31 -0700, kashani wrote about Re:
[gentoo-user] Don't start a new thread by changing the subject:

[snip]
> 	My understanding is that the NNTP server was munging headers
> thereby creating new threads where it should have been a single
> thread.

Your subject line reads as though that is what you are asking, as some
MUAs preserve threading until the Subject: header changes -- even when
the Message-ID: line has been mangled.

> This is users responding to an existing email, removing all
> content, changing the subject, and then sending the mail which keeps
> the thread headers and make it appear to be part of the current
> thread.

That is called "thread hijacking" and has been considered a breach of
netiquette for at least 25 years.  However, the influx of computer
illiterates to the Internet in the last 15 or so years has caused
netiquette to be "more honoured in the breach than the observance."

Likewise for HTML messages, top posting, lack of snipping, etc.

Unfortunately, I see all of these misdemeanours on software development
mailing lists, particularly those related to the Free Pascal Compiler,
and software developers *should* know better.  Worse still, the people
who make these gaffes don't see anything wrong and refuse to accept that
traditional netiquette should apply to them.
-- 
Regards,

Dave  [RLU #314465]
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
dwnoon@ntlworld.com (David W Noon)
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Don't start a new thread by changing the subject

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Saturday 25 June 2011 01:09:31 David W Noon wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:12:26 -0700, kashani wrote about [gentoo-user]
> 
> Don't start a new thread by changing the subject:
> > 	I've noticed this a couple of times this week. A few of you
> > 
> > have responded to the annoying Fortran thread, changed the subject,
> > started a new message, and sent the email starting a new thread.
> 
> You're a week or two behind the times.  The root cause of this was done
> to death some time ago.  It is the bofh.it NNTP server that propagates
> this mailing list through Usenet.  There is nothing we can do except
> avoid using servers downstream from that rogue server.


completely different problem.

there are:

lazy idiots hitting 'reply' and then create a new message breaking threads. 
Suddenly you have a misnamed subthread confusing everybody or annoy me.

stupid servers mangling headers breaking threads so answers create new 
threads.

Of course, those who use usenet servers for gentoo-ml are to be blamed for the 
second problem. Is there any good, valid reason to do so?
-- 
#163933

Re: [gentoo-user] Don't start a new thread by changing the subject

[Alan McKinnon]

On Saturday 25 June 2011 13:47:15 Volker Armin Hemmann did opine 
thusly:
> On Saturday 25 June 2011 01:09:31 David W Noon wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:12:26 -0700, kashani wrote about
> > [gentoo-user]
> > 
> > Don't start a new thread by changing the subject:
> > > 	I've noticed this a couple of times this week. A few of
> > > 	you
> > > 
> > > have responded to the annoying Fortran thread, changed the
> > > subject, started a new message, and sent the email starting
> > > a new thread.
> > 
> > You're a week or two behind the times.  The root cause of this
> > was done to death some time ago.  It is the bofh.it NNTP server
> > that propagates this mailing list through Usenet.  There is
> > nothing we can do except avoid using servers downstream from
> > that rogue server.
> 
> completely different problem.
> 
> there are:
> 
> lazy idiots hitting 'reply' and then create a new message breaking
> threads. Suddenly you have a misnamed subthread confusing everybody
> or annoy me.
> 
> stupid servers mangling headers breaking threads so answers create
> new threads.
> 
> Of course, those who use usenet servers for gentoo-ml are to be
> blamed for the second problem. Is there any good, valid reason to
> do so?
-- 

Lots of good reasons - usenet has been around for yonks, mailing lists 
work like usenet groups, users would like to use an nntp app to read 
ml mail. Good motivation to write proper gateways.

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Don't start a new thread by changing the subject

[Alan Mackenzie]

On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 08:32:46PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Saturday 25 June 2011 13:47:15 Volker Armin Hemmann did opine 
> thusly:
> > On Saturday 25 June 2011 01:09:31 David W Noon wrote:
> > > On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:12:26 -0700, kashani wrote about
> > > [gentoo-user]

> > > Don't start a new thread by changing the subject:
> > > > 	I've noticed this a couple of times this week. A few of
> > > > 	you

> > > > have responded to the annoying Fortran thread, changed the
> > > > subject, started a new message, and sent the email starting
> > > > a new thread.

> > > You're a week or two behind the times.  The root cause of this
> > > was done to death some time ago.  It is the bofh.it NNTP server
> > > that propagates this mailing list through Usenet.  There is
> > > nothing we can do except avoid using servers downstream from
> > > that rogue server.

> > completely different problem.

> > there are:

> > lazy idiots hitting 'reply' and then create a new message breaking
> > threads. Suddenly you have a misnamed subthread confusing everybody
> > or annoy me.

> > stupid servers mangling headers breaking threads so answers create
> > new threads.

> > Of course, those who use usenet servers for gentoo-ml are to be
> > blamed for the second problem. Is there any good, valid reason to
> > do so?

> Lots of good reasons - usenet has been around for yonks, mailing lists 
> work like usenet groups, users would like to use an nntp app to read 
> ml mail. Good motivation to write proper gateways.

As a matter of interest, posting to gentoo-user via NNTP seems to be
blocked by the moderation software.  At least it was a few weeks ago when
I tried to post that way.

> -- 
> alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: [gentoo-user] Don't start a new thread by changing the subject

[Marc Joliet]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1195 bytes --]

Am Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:12:26 -0700
schrieb kashani <kashani-list@badapple.net>:

> 	I've noticed this a couple of times this week. A few of you have 
> responded to the annoying Fortran thread, changed the subject, started a 
> new message, and sent the email starting a new thread.

I have not noticed this. Scanning through the thread, I do not see any subject
changes.

> 	Because you responded to an existing thread you are not creating a new 
> thread and thus and reducing the size of the audience that reads your 
> email. Specially I'd have responded to "open source monitoring on 
> gentoo", but since I deleted the Fortran thread in its boring entirety I 
> didn't even see it until I saw a response further down the chain today. 
> Whoever started Fbsplash did the same thing.

For me, both of the threads you mention appear as their own threads (using
claws-mail). So I checked the email sources and could not find any "References"
headers in either of the thread parents. So, perhaps this is a bug in
Thunderbird?

> kashani

HTH
-- 
Marc Joliet
--
"People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we
don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Don't start a new thread by changing the subject

[enno+gentoo]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 889 bytes --]

Hi,

Am 25.06.2011 10:09, schrieb Marc Joliet:
> Am Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:12:26 -0700
> schrieb kashani <kashani-list@badapple.net>:
>> 	Because you responded to an existing thread you are not creating a new 
>> thread and thus and reducing the size of the audience that reads your 
>> email. Specially I'd have responded to "open source monitoring on 
>> gentoo", but since I deleted the Fortran thread in its boring entirety I 
>> didn't even see it until I saw a response further down the chain today. 
>> Whoever started Fbsplash did the same thing.
> 
> For me, both of the threads you mention appear as their own threads (using
> claws-mail). So I checked the email sources and could not find any "References"
> headers in either of the thread parents. So, perhaps this is a bug in
> Thunderbird?
Fine here, too.
Using mail-client/thunderbird-3.1.10.

HTH,
Enno


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 262 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Don't start a new thread by changing the subject

[methylherd]

Am Samstag, 25. Juni 2011, 10:09:17 schrieb Marc Joliet:
> Am Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:12:26 -0700
> 
> schrieb kashani <kashani-list@badapple.net>:
> > 	I've noticed this a couple of times this week. A few of you have
> > 
> > responded to the annoying Fortran thread, changed the subject, started a
> > new message, and sent the email starting a new thread.
> 
> I have not noticed this. Scanning through the thread, I do not see any
> subject changes.
> 
> > 	Because you responded to an existing thread you are not creating a new
> > 
> > thread and thus and reducing the size of the audience that reads your
> > email. Specially I'd have responded to "open source monitoring on
> > gentoo", but since I deleted the Fortran thread in its boring entirety I
> > didn't even see it until I saw a response further down the chain today.
> > Whoever started Fbsplash did the same thing.
> 
> For me, both of the threads you mention appear as their own threads (using
> claws-mail). So I checked the email sources and could not find any
> "References" headers in either of the thread parents. So, perhaps this is
> a bug in Thunderbird?
> 
> > kashani
> 
> HTH

same here, no thread problems with kde-base/kmail-4.4.11.1

Maybe you should really check your client.

Greets