HiJacking Threads -- apology & new (OT??) question
Tim
ignored_mailbox at yahoo.com.au
Sun Jan 4 03:42:55 UTC 2009
On Sat, 2009-01-03 at 20:38 +0000, Beartooth wrote:
> I also want to ask a question I haven't seen yet in this thread.
> Suppose I happen on a new fact that sends *me* off on a tangent --
> something I've long meant to ask about, but not really relevant to the
> thread. (Here, for instance,it might be "Things the Uninitiated Need to
> Know and Never Get Told.")
>
> To do it, I naturally ought to start a new thread -- but also
> give the passage about the "*In* Reply-to" header, with credit to P O'C
> and what would be a bibliographic footnote if we were doing this in old-
> fashioned paper journals.
Common sense would dictate that it's either a reply, or it's not.
If it's in reply to the prior message, than write it as a reply. If
it's not in "reply," even if it's something that's been inspired by
another message, then it's a *new* message.
If you need to refer to something from another message, then there's
several ways of doing so:
* Simply quote the part of the message concerned.
* Write something like, "See Fred's message on Tuesday re threading"
into your message. That allows people to find it.
* Find the URI for the message on the Fedora archive, and include that
in your message.
* Write the message ID for it into your message. Though, it's a long
time since I've come across a client that could find a message for you
from a quoted message ID (it'd find it in your local cache of messages,
after left- or right-clicking on the ID). I think it was a usenet
client on the Amiga, or perhaps Forte Inc's Agent, that could do that.
--
[tim at localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.9-73.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list