Hijacking Threads [was: Re: rsync link corruption with -H and --link-dest]
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 14:36:06 +0000
"Gareth Evans" <donotspam@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> ...but what did I do wrong re thread hijacking?
>
> I understand that to mean changing the content of an existing thread,
> as a quick google seems to confirm.
Correct.
>
> I did delete the content and change the subject of an existing email,
> which appears to me to create a new thread, rather than preserving
> "conversation" links to the deleted content/subject.
Yes. Which is how one usually hijacks a thread.
The problem is that among the headers in emails is one that provides an
identifier for the thread. So properly written mail user agents (MUA,
your email client) will put the freshly hijacked message right into the
thread anyway.
Why this is wrong:
* It interrupts the flow of the thread by interpolating a completely
new subject in the middle of an existing thread.
* It makes it harder for searchers later on to find your subject, hence
to find any solution to your problem.
* Starting a new email is usually easier than hijacking a thread, so
why bother?
--
Does anybody read signatures any more?
https://charlescurley.com
https://charlescurley.com/blog/
Reply to: