Google| Subject | Re: Will Tony apologize? (was: Re: Colonial Photo & Hobby) |
| From | Tony Cooper |
| Date | 2014-04-27 22:01 (2014-04-27 16:01) |
| Message-ID | <7tmql9d2ol1rot4dpo3s7d54rcknkjjjon@4ax.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
| Follows | Savageduck |
| Followups | Savageduck (54m) > Tony Cooper |
On Sun, 27 Apr 2014 09:49:50 -0700, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>wrote:
SavageduckIt's an interesting situation that's based - seemingly - on how a person views the posts in their newsreader.
On 2014-04-27 15:40:00 +0000, Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com>said:Tony CooperSavageduck
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.
Not necessarily. He really would have had to create a fresh post, not a reply from within the same parent post thread.
As far as I'm concerned, a "thread" is a series of posts in some sort of sequence. I won't say they have to be on the same subject because the posts within a thread don't necessarily have to remain about the same subject. A thread is viewed as a block of posts.
What Jonas did was create a new subject line. That, as Agent views it, places the post in a different sequence in the list of posts and not in any sequence with the posts of the thread before the change. The resulting thread is separated from the original thread. As far as I'm concerned, that's a new thread.
Evidently, not all newsreaders treat this the same. Jonas - while he has not stated it - seems to use something that does not break up the sequential aspect of the posts. I don't know what yours does, and I don't know what all the other newsreaders that are used by participants in this group do.
We know that content does not determine what a thread is because we've seen so many threads start off on one thing and then veer off from that completely. That leaves "sequence" and "position" as good contenders for defining a thread. Jonas created a post that did not follow in sequence or fall in the same position on this - and probably many other - screens.
Jonas has made a claim (unsubstantiated) that Forte Agent is a "broken" newsreader and does not follow "standards". (I'm paraphrasing because I can't be bothered to look up his actual words)
In participating in newsgroups for many years, and in many newsgroups, I've never seen anyone suggest this before. Most of the groups I follow - or have followed - have been groups with participants from all over the globe. Many different news providers and newsreaders are or have been used. Most people regard both news.individual.net and Forte Agent (the combo that I use) as both reliable and at least equal to or better than any other news reader or newsreader.
I don't imagine that Jonas will be able to substantiate his claim, but we may see an "onslaught" of empty verbiage - maybe including examples of ordering pizza or picking up medicines - purporting to do so.
-- Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
2014-04-14-
