| 1 |
On Saturday 25 June 2011 13:47:15 Volker Armin Hemmann did opine |
| 2 |
thusly: |
| 3 |
> On Saturday 25 June 2011 01:09:31 David W Noon wrote: |
| 4 |
> > On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:12:26 -0700, kashani wrote about |
| 5 |
> > [gentoo-user] |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > Don't start a new thread by changing the subject: |
| 8 |
> > > I've noticed this a couple of times this week. A few of |
| 9 |
> > > you |
| 10 |
> > > |
| 11 |
> > > have responded to the annoying Fortran thread, changed the |
| 12 |
> > > subject, started a new message, and sent the email starting |
| 13 |
> > > a new thread. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > You're a week or two behind the times. The root cause of this |
| 16 |
> > was done to death some time ago. It is the bofh.it NNTP server |
| 17 |
> > that propagates this mailing list through Usenet. There is |
| 18 |
> > nothing we can do except avoid using servers downstream from |
| 19 |
> > that rogue server. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> completely different problem. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> there are: |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> lazy idiots hitting 'reply' and then create a new message breaking |
| 26 |
> threads. Suddenly you have a misnamed subthread confusing everybody |
| 27 |
> or annoy me. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> stupid servers mangling headers breaking threads so answers create |
| 30 |
> new threads. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> Of course, those who use usenet servers for gentoo-ml are to be |
| 33 |
> blamed for the second problem. Is there any good, valid reason to |
| 34 |
> do so? |
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Lots of good reasons - usenet has been around for yonks, mailing lists |
| 38 |
work like usenet groups, users would like to use an nntp app to read |
| 39 |
ml mail. Good motivation to write proper gateways. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives