Google| Subject | Re: Will Tony apologize? (was: Re: Colonial Photo & Hobby) |
| From | Sandman |
| Date | 04/26/2014 12:39 (04/26/2014 12:39) |
| Message-ID | <slrnlln3c5.tpk.mr@irc.sandman.net> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Eric Stevens |
| Followups | Eric Stevens (11h & 38m) > Sandman |
In article <e07ml991unlq3u5e3ehgk1247nkhjhknld@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:
SavageduckEric Stevens
With mine, Unison, even if the Subject line is changed the continuity and timeline of the original thread is maintained regardless of what is typed in the Subject line. I have to active start a new post with new Subject line rather replying with an altered subject line to start a new thread. So for me regardless of what the subject line reads, or what Jonas's intent was in this case a new thread was not created. Both subject lines are contained within the original thread. < https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_665.jpg >
Not all news readers behave in this way. Some have default behaviour (either way) built in, with others (such as Agent) it is configurable.
I'm used to a setup where a new thread is started when someone changes the subject sufficiently to justify a new subject header.What you're used to is irrelevant. A thread is a series of messages on usenet that are related to each other via the References header. This is how a standards-compliant news reader should sort messages, i.e. if a message has a Message-ID in the References header, it is a reply to that message.
The standard is to keep as many Message-ID's in the header as possible, and also that the original topic post should be the first Message-ID in the header.
So, if a post has Message-ID's in the References header, it's a reply to another post, and part of that thread, regardless of any other changes.
One can change the subject line, which may change the *subject* of that part of the thread, but that does not in any shape, way or form create a new thread.
Hope that helps.
-- Sandman[.net]
04/14/2014-
