On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 20:52:01 -0400 Chris Metzler <cmetzler@speakeasy.net> wrote: > On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 10:24:06 +1000 > Clement <clement@ans.com.au> wrote: > > Wayne Topa wrote: > >> > >>On both occasions you hi-jacked another thread rather then > >>starting a new one (bad practice). > > > > > > I DID NOT hi-jack anything. > > Yes, you did. Not according to Sylpheed. Both times he started new threads > > If the subject I used is the same as a > > previous email, it is pure coincidence. I will search the archives. > > > > Please do not assume too much. > > Hijacking a thread has *nothing* to do with using a subject that's the > same as an earlier thread or message. > > Hijacking a thread is when one posts a message on a new topic, > with a new subject line, by "Replying" to an existing message in > the list rather than by posting an entirely new message. > > The first time you posted your HylaFax problems, you did so by > replying to a post of Paul Condon's in the "ALSA setup problem" > thread. This is made clear by the "References:" header in that > email: > > } From: Clement <clement@ans.com.au> > } Subject: HylaFax receives rubbish > } References: <[🔎] 20040801181244.GB7490@mesanetworks.net> > <[🔎] 20040802093514.3b4154b6@stax> > <[🔎] 20040803021234.GA1047@mesanetworks.net>} > } Just tried Hylafax. After spending hours to play around, I finally > got > [ snip ] > > If you had simply sent a "new" message, rather than replying, no > "References:" header would be present. That header tells mail > software that your message is a reply to another message, which had > Message ID <[🔎] 20040803021234.GA1047@mesanetworks.net> (which in turn > was a reply to a message with Message ID > <[🔎] 20040802093514.3b4154b6@stax> and so on). In other words, in that > thread, I replied to Paul Condon, he replied to me, and then you > replied to him -- but with a new subject line, and a topic of > discussion that had nothing to do with the topic previously discussed > in the thread. That's hijacking a thread. > > Similarly, your other post was a reply to a post by Pascal Hakim, > in the thread 'can't post to "linux.debian.user" "solved"'. Your > references header there was: > > } References: <[🔎] 87657e4w8d.fsf@jidanni.org> > <[🔎] 20040819234322.GA23117@wonderland.linux.it> > <[🔎] slrn-0.9.7.4-7239-20102-200408201550-tc@hexane.ssi.swin.edu.au> > <[🔎] 20040820083236.GA4620@wonderland.linux.it> > <[🔎] cg4p76$8fc$1@sea.gmane.org> > <[🔎] 1093009996.6678.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> > <[🔎] slrn-0.9.7.4-3238-31964-200408211523-tc@hexane.ssi.swin.edu.au> > <[🔎] 20040825094149.GA17728@master.debian.org> > > That, too, was hijacking a thread. > > Incidentally, this one -- the one you posted in reply to Pascal > Hakim -- was the one that Wayne Topa replied to, letting you know > what was up. Your reply to him, however, had "References:" assigned > to it so that it's indexed as a reply to yourself, in the *other* > thread. > > It looks like you're having some difficulties with your mail > reader. > > -c > -- Rodney D. Myers <rdmyers@MtPalomar.net> Registered Linux User #96112 ICQ#: AIM#: YAHOO: 18002350 mailman452 mailman42_5 They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Ben Franklin - 1759
Attachment:
pgpo_c5xfeCdZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature