[OT] threading (was: The ultimate luxury ?)
From: Jeff Relf (Jeff_Relf__at__NCPlus.NET.Invalid)
Date: 07/31/04
- Next message: stan: "Re: "The map is not the Territory"..."
- Previous message: ExtremeOne: "Re: How to handle 'Uncle Al' aka "Alan Schwartz" <uncleal0@ix.netcom.com>"
- In reply to: Johan Lindquist: "[OT] threading (was: The ultimate luxury ?)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 31 Jul 2004 00:48:47 GMT
Hi Johan Lindquist,
RFC 1036 ( and plain good manners ) dictate that
titles should reveal the content of the message.
And, because the parents are still in the References line
( or should be ) a good newsreader can still
navigate to the parents despite the different titles.
( Note: Google is not a good newsreader )
Also, I would never place a Followup-To: line in the headers,
like you just did,
because it cuts people off from the conversation.
( But lets not argue about that,
a good newsreader would let one ignore that )
Notice that I used the phrase
" A Good Newsreader " three times,
That's why I'm writing my own newsreader ( called X ).
And " operator error " is also a major factor here.
- Next message: stan: "Re: "The map is not the Territory"..."
- Previous message: ExtremeOne: "Re: How to handle 'Uncle Al' aka "Alan Schwartz" <uncleal0@ix.netcom.com>"
- In reply to: Johan Lindquist: "[OT] threading (was: The ultimate luxury ?)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
