Re: Thread hijacking
On 2009-08-28 17:04 +0200, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 09:33:57AM -0500, David Young wrote:
>> On Fri, August 28, 2009 9:14 am, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> > No, look at the "References" header in your message¹. When starting a
>> > new thread, this header does not exist, because there are no messages
>> > you are referring to.
>> >
>> > Hitting "Reply all" (or whatever you did) and changing subject does
>> > *not* start a new thread.
>>
>>
>> I'm clearly too ill-informed to be here.
>> Apologies for the intrusion.
>
> There is really no need to be that way. Sven was most likely pointing
> this out for your own good as much as anything else.
I had meant it that way; my apologies to David if it sounded rude.
> This can be a high-volume list and it is quite common for people here
> to ignore entire threads if it is something that does not interest
> them, or is something they cannot help with. By hijacking the thread
> (even your own thread) with a new topic like this would cause a
> significant number of people to miss your question completely.
>
> Additionally, if someone is reading the thread, it is common for the
> original conversation to continue even while your new topic is started
> under the new thread. This results in a serious disconnect of the
> conversation.
>
> If you are new to mailing lists like this, don't worry about it, just
> accept the lessons and in no time at all you'll be up to speed.
I wonder whether this problem (people inadvertently hitting
Follow-up/Reply when they should compose a fresh message instead) should
be mentioned in the Code of Conduct¹.
Sven
¹ http://www.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Reply to: