Tom Kunich is [an] ass

David Damerell writes:

Quoting :
Michael Press writes:
No, changing the subject header does not change alter the
threading.

Speak for your own news reader. Tin, the UNIX threaded news reader
that I use, keeps threads by title

No; you are misusing the term "thread". A "thread" is a group of
articles associated because of Message-IDs and References lines.

What tin does is group-by-Subject, which is inferior to true
threading. The answer is to get a newsreader which functions
correctly.

Given that Jobst uses Emacs, he's got a great option in Gnus right on
his computer (M-x gnus). The current version is 5.10.6, I think; the
CVS version is 5.11. All he has to do is set up his .gnus config file
and he is in business. There are some great e-mail client options as
well.

Jobst Brandt wrote:
Tom Sherman writes:

....By the way, changing the title loses the thread and starts a
new one, which is also none too good for tracking where the
discussion arose....

I will remind you of this thread:

http://tinyurl.com/d4tky

Note who changed the thread title.

I missed that entirely as my spell checker offered AOL for the
misspelled word OL. Apparently I changed that inadvertently. The new
version of my spell checker no longer offers AOL as the first
replacement choice for OL. I make enough typos that I usually spell
check the item which then starts at the top of the page.

I am disappointed. I thought it was a clever bit of intentional humor.

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

In article ,
Werehatrack wrote:

On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 06:07:44 GMT, "Nuckin' Futz"
wrote:

wrote:

... By the way, changing the title loses the thread and
starts a new one

No it doesn't.

With the majority of the various newsreaders I have used, the behavior
reported by Jobst is what takes place. While there are newsreaders
which thread only by the references and which display the subject
breakages (or don't, in at least one particularly antimemorable case),
the most popular neewsreaders do not, in fact, do this. As a result,
on the whole, Jobst's observation is accurate; for most readers,
changing the subject breaks the thread.

Whether this is a Good Thing, a Bad Thing, a Stupid Misfeature, a
Matter Of Preference, an Inconsequential Piece Of Minutiae, or Grounds
For A Flame Jihad is, of course, something that has been debated
endlessly...but given the behavior of the most commonly used readers,
it appears that the thread-by-reference side can't claim a victory
just yet.

Most news readers _can_ thread using the References header
and the Message-ID header. Sometimes setting the
configuration is daunting. As I said elsewhere, Tin can be
so configured.

--
Michael Press

Michael Press:
David Damerell wrote:
What tin does is group-by-Subject, which is inferior to true threading.
The answer is to get a newsreader which functions correctly.
That is what Tin does by default, but Tin can sort by references.

Aha! I'm glad that's fixed.

2 References, thread on ''References:'' only.
3 Both Subject and References, thread on ''References:'' then
''Subject:'' (default).

So I think option 2 is the right thing here. Presumably what #3 does is to
group by Subject but use References: correctly within sets of articles
with a common Subject line, like Google Groups.
--
David Damerell Distortion Field!
Today is Second Brieday, December.

Quoting Werehatrack :
the most popular neewsreaders do not, in fact, do this. As a result,
on the whole, Jobst's observation is accurate; for most readers,
changing the subject breaks the thread.

No. What a "thread" is is not dependent on the observer's newsreader; it's
a property of the articles. That is the only way we can use the term
meaningfully.

That many popular newsreaders are broken is unfortunate, but really, it's
up to them to fix it.
--
David Damerell Distortion Field!
Today is Second Brieday, December.

The following is what Tin thinks a thread is and Tin is a lot older
than most newsreaders used by most participants in thei forum. The
term "thread" as in T-I-N "Threaded Internet News"

http://www.tin.org/
http://www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de...faq.html#ToC02

================================================== =========================

Thu, 29 Dec 2005 10:38:16 rec.bicycles.tech Thread 7 of 16
Lines 14 Changing the title does WHAT? (... RespNo 3 of 3
David Damerell at Linux Unlimited

Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech

Quoting Werehatrack :
the most popular neewsreaders do not, in fact, do this. As a result,
on the whole, Jobst's observation is accurate; for most readers,
changing the subject breaks the thread.

No. What a "thread" is is not dependent on the observer's newsreader; it's
a property of the articles. That is the only way we can use the term
meaningfully.

That many popular newsreaders are broken is unfortunate, but really, it's
up to them to fix it.
--
David Damerell Distortion Field!
Today is Second Brieday, December.
================================================== =========================

Jobst Brandt

On 29 Dec 2005 19:42:09 GMT, wrote:

Quoting Werehatrack :
the most popular neewsreaders do not, in fact, do this. As a result,
on the whole, Jobst's observation is accurate; for most readers,
changing the subject breaks the thread.

No. What a "thread" is is not dependent on the observer's newsreader; it's
a property of the articles. That is the only way we can use the term
meaningfully.

Meaning, as the folks at Oxford will tell you, is defined by usage;
tin's usage is no longer the general one. Sorry, they've been
outvoted; the language has moved on. (And yes, this is often called
the "'n' could be a vowel if enough people believed it" argument, but
as statistically no one accepts that absurd contention, it's a straw
man of no value.)

That many popular newsreaders are broken is unfortunate, but really, it's
up to them to fix it.

One cannot fix what one has no control over, and perhaps more
importantly, many people *prefer* that the thread be defined by the
subject line. It is this fact that has determined the behavior of the
most widely used newsreaders, and probably accounts in part for the
fact that they *are* the most widely used newsreaders. No doubt this
is what has driven the interface design at Google as well.

Be happy that you have a reader that functions the way *you* want it
to; accept that yours does not work the way that *others* want
*theirs* to work, and consider the ramifications.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

In article ,
David Damerell wrote:

Quoting Werehatrack :
the most popular neewsreaders do not, in fact, do this. As a result,
on the whole, Jobst's observation is accurate; for most readers,
changing the subject breaks the thread.

No. What a "thread" is is not dependent on the observer's newsreader; it's
a property of the articles. That is the only way we can use the term
meaningfully.

That many popular newsreaders are broken is unfortunate, but really, it's
up to them to fix it.

Do you know that most news readers cannot organize article
headers according to the References headers? Which ones? I
have used Netscape, Tin, and Newswatcher; these three can.

--
Michael Press

Hi,


wrote:
http://www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de...faq.html#ToC02

That is outdated for years, unfortunately old documentation never
dies on the net...


Today's tin (and your tin/1.7.10-20050929 is a pretty recent one)
offer its user all choices about how to thread:

~/.tin/tinrc:
# Thread articles by ...
# Possible values are (the default is marked with *):
# 0 = nothing
# 1 = Subject
# 2 = References
# * 3 = Both (Subject and References)
# 4 = Multipart Subject
thread_articles=2

You can also use the menu under 'M' to change the setting within
tin.


Slightly off topic here though,

--
MfG/Best regards
helmut springer

On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 20:24:24 GMT, Werehatrack
wrote:

With the majority of the various newsreaders I have used, the behavior
reported by Jobst is what takes place. While there are newsreaders
which thread only by the references and which display the subject
breakages (or don't, in at least one particularly antimemorable case),
the most popular neewsreaders do not, in fact, do this. As a result,
on the whole, Jobst's observation is accurate; for most readers,
changing the subject breaks the thread.

Mine actually has an option, I can thread by Reference or by SUbject, but
I greatly prefer to do so by Subject.

Jasper