Subject | Re: Will Tony apologize? (was: Re: Colonial Photo & Hobby) |
From | Savageduck |
Date | 04/27/2014 18:49 (04/27/2014 09:49) |
Message-ID | <2014042709495021123-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | Tony Cooper |
Followups | android (48m) > Savageduck Sandman (58m) Tony Cooper (3h & 11m) > Savageduck |
Tony CooperNot necessarily. He really would have had to create a fresh post, not a reply from within the same parent post thread.
On 27 Apr 2014 09:10:37 GMT, Sandman <mr@sandman.net>wrote:SandmanTony Cooper
This is incorrect. A thread is not "usually" determined by the subject line.
Right. Absolutely right. A thread is *always* determined by the subject line. You created a new thread.
From the reader's standpoint, that's why we want threads. The subject line identifies what is supposed to be in the body of the post.That is not what happened in this case because of how Jonas produced the sub-thread Subject line from a message already parented by the OP.
Sometimes we skip entire threads because we have no interest in reading about what is stated in the subject line.Actually nothing changed other than the wording in the Subject line. All the posts parented by the original from April 14, 2014 are grouped together as thread and sub-thread. There is no new thread.
When the subject matter changes (what some people call "thread drift"), a new subject line creates a new thread so people will know that a new subject has been introduced.
You created a new thread, but didn't really change the subject matter. It was just more nattering on about the same thing.