Re: Hijacking Threads [was: Re: rsync link corruption with -H and --link-dest]
On Sun, 22 Nov 2020, at 15:38, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Nov 2020 17:10:10 +0200
> Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Andrei,
>
> >Starting a new e-mail requires filling out at least the To: address so
> >it is easier to reply instead (especially with many addresses in To:
> >and Cc: that one wants to keep).
>
> For many people, yes. However......
>
> Once one sets up an MUA correctly, one only has to click 'Compose' for
> all the required fields, apart from Subject, to be filled in.
>
> The trouble is, many, many people are used to the way Microsoft's MUA
> does things; that is - not at all, or even worse, incorrectly.
>
> Examples:
> In-Reply-To headers being transported, but not honoured
> An inability to filter on sensible headers like List-Id
>
> You'll notice I've used Claws Mail's ability to Remove references, to
> place this mail outside the hi-jacked thread.
>
> --
> Regards _
> / ) "The blindingly obvious is
> / _)rad never immediately apparent"
> The public gets what the public wants
> Going Underground - The Jam
>
Thanks to all who have replied pointing out the issues.
In my defence, I don't use conversation view in general (so lack experience) and had imagined Fastmail's documented approach (for its webmail and app) to be standards-based:
"Conversations get split apart and form new conversation threads when:
1. The subject changes
This usually means a new topic is being discussed so a new conversation thread is formed.
[...]"
https://www.fastmail.com/help/receive/conversations.html
I now realise this is at odds with the relevant standards (and eg. Thunderbird's approach):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversation_threading
Anyway, apologies.
Brad:
> Once one sets up an MUA correctly, one only has to click 'Compose' for
> all the required fields, apart from Subject, to be filled in.
When does clicking "compose" have this effect?
Thanks,
Gareth
Reply to: