 | | Re: Broken mailers which mess up threading
|
|
(...) Ya, that Larry! :-) Lemme see if I can conjur it up again. OK, here it is: (2 URLs) [...] (...) According to the NNTP headers, ya, it was posted via email. --Todd (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Broken mailers which mess up threading
|
|
(...) This Larry? Can you post the URL, I will take a look at it and tell you what the circs were. I make it a practice not to reply via email EVER but always use the web (or very rarely, NNTP via NS comm 4.7 from my home PC) to reply. (...) I don't (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Broken mailers which mess up threading
|
|
(...) I really don't think it's worth the time to work around it -- only to weed out non-compliant mailers in a consistent and reliable way. If someone is using a broken newsreader or mailer that doesn't put in the right headers, tough cookies for (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Posting cancel request
|
|
Hello Todd, Could you please cancel my message Marketplace/Buy/Sell/Trade/8315 ? In this post I gave an example of using the partsref and using the direct links to the part images, but due to a relocation of partsef, the example links became (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Incorrect group posting [was RE: cartoonnetwork.com is having an online contest]
|
|
(...) So what're you waiting for? Steve (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Broken mailers which mess up threading
|
|
(...) that's one place where we have a choice to make... does re-subjecting make a new thread, or is it still a child of the current thread? most of the time, by the time someone re-subjected a post, it's 3-4 posts AFTER the subject has been (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Broken mailers which mess up threading
|
|
(...) the problem is, we're dealing with mailers that are just not RFC compliant. Which is why they don't have the references: header in the first place... and we're trying to cludge something around their shortcomings, just so the pretty threading (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Broken mailers which mess up threading
|
|
(...) It sounds like if the References: header is used to trace threads, then the Subject: header should begin with "Re: ". I suppose the original intent was that new threads would be started if the Subject: was changed (but that's pure conjecture (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Broken mailers which mess up threading
|
|
(...) Except cases where you do the "(was: ...)" thing, right? --Todd (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Broken mailers which mess up threading
|
|
(...) I'd say that's perfectly in line with with RFC 850, Section 2.2.6. It clearly says that a References: headers is "required for all follow-up articles" and that the first four characters of the Subject: header should be changed to "Re: " if (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Broken mailers which mess up threading
|
|
(...) how about, instead of rejecting such messages, make a "soft" threading feature... and activate it only for mailers you know are broken (lke that Internet Mail Service, Eudora, etc)... Just write a little proggie that will attempt to guess what (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Incorrect group posting [was RE: cartoonnetwork.com is having an online contest]
|
|
(...) Yea, that's better. Frank (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Incorrect group posting [was RE: cartoonnetwork.com is having an online contest]
|
|
(...) I still think this is a great idea. I would put them under .year.#### though. --Todd (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Broken mailers which mess up threading
|
|
This broken thread garbage has got to stop. Example: (2 URLs) countless other examples in the .loc.au group.) The question is, how do I detect this broken mailer that Ben's using? It reports itself as: X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Incorrect group posting [was RE: cartoonnetwork.com is having an online contest]
|
|
(...) Yes, down here we get a limited range [It took some effort even to get the entire football range this year...we were only initially to get the ground itself.] To all those .us people complaining about .eu only sets, and .eu people complaining (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Incorrect group posting [was RE: cartoonnetwork.com is having an online contest]
|
|
(...) And also what I was hoping would happen/what I was referring to. (...) Everyone is free to have their own ideas...After all, how boring would the world be otherwise? (...) My thought was that .general was for the initial announcement/info with (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Incorrect group posting [was RE: cartoonnetwork.com is having an online contest]
|
|
(...) You are correct Todd. I didn't realize it was a US only thing until the question was asked. Sorry. Julie (24 years ago, 9-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | Re: Incorrect group posting [was RE: cartoonnetwork.com is having an online contest]
|
|
[reposted with corrections] (...) Well, try not to take it out on others, especially people in AU -- who get stuffed pretty badly by LEGO on a lot of things. Do you think AU residents feel any better about EU offerings that US residents do? And (...) (24 years ago, 9-Oct-00, to lugnet.admin.nntp)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
