-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> For lurkers, what David is apparently abjectly incapable of expressing is
> that email includes a "References" header that lists previous message IDs
> (Header "Message-Id") such that the emails may be "threaded".
Have you read anything I've been saying at all? The header
"References" is a news article posting header, not an email header. Email
replies carry an "In-Reply-To" header. Spend a bit less time trying to find
useless ways to insult me, and more time reading the links I provided,
fully, before responding with information which is misleading and incorrect.
> I generally don't see "threaded" email views (i.e. even if they were
> available to me, I never looked at them) and I presume more people are
> like me than like David... certainly his recent battles over this supports
> my surmise... so this is an important and new relevation to quite possibly
> more than a few of us.
Again, you seem to indicate that this "threading" is a feature that
was never there before. The threading capability exists in every single
email message sent, regardless of whether or not it is on a mailing list, or
a series of messages sent from one person directly to another. You don't
need to know that threading exists, or even use it, to know that hitting
"Reply" to a message, and then NOT replying to that message, is incorrect
behavior. Let's make an analogy, shall we?
If two people call your voice mail, one from your work asking you to
work late, and one from your girlfriend, asking you to pick up butter from
the store... would you "Reply" to the work one, and begin asking your
girlfriend what kind of butter she wants you to get? Would you "Reply" to
your girlfriend's message, telling work that you're not going to be able to
work late? No, you wouldn't. See my point?
I suspect I am like the rest of the thousands upon thousands of
people who use email as a tool, and rely on the functions provided by that
tool, such as threading. Perhaps you need to revisit your selection of mail
clients, and choose one that supports the standards, or makes it easier and
more powerful to use the features "hidden" from you by your current one.
Spend less time fighting with people and more time learning about
the technology you assert to know so well, and you may find yourself
enlightened at the wealth of power behind even the simplest of tools...
email.
> David, no matter how often and repeatedly you are rude and dogmatic to
> those not following your standards, it won't convey the reasons and change
> their behavior nearly as quickly as simply stating the above would.
You're barking up the wrong tree. Your repeated insults and abuse of
the developers here since your very first message to the list, does not bode
well for your standing, being such a newcomer to the project and to the list
in general. You may actually earn the title of the second troll ever to
grace the lists, if present behavior continues to be the norm.
If you have a problem with me, take it up with me directly, not on
the list. These little skirmishes you create for yourself (and apparently
ONLY for yourself), do nothing but hurt the list and the readers on the
list.
Go search google, put in my name, do some research about what I do,
the dozens of communities I contribute to, the thousands of users who are
thankful I'm doing the work I'm doing to help them, the vast wealth of
documentation I've written to make others' lives easier, all for absolutely
nothing, gratis. (Be sure to use the proper syntax: +David +A. +Desrosiers)
> Certainly your bizarre suggestion that people would figure this out by
> reading previous posts suggests a surreal disconnect from reality... if
> you don't KNOW about the threading problem, how on earth would you discern
> the connection to "reply" from reading the archives on Plucker?!?
Reading the prior archives on the Plucker list has nothing at all to
do with figuring out that threading messages is made possible through the
use of the In-Reply-To header by the various mail client applications out
there. I've never made this assumption, so why did you?
You once again, are wildly askew from the issue. Threading has
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AT ALL to do with the broken logic behind hijacking an
email message destined for a mailing list, hitting reply, and then changing
every single thing about that message (subject, body, etc.) and sending it
back to the list.
When you do this, you ARE NOT REPLYING to the original message, and
therefore, carrying along the In-Reply-To header with your message is a
misleading entity, for those of us who happen to read our mail in a threaded
fashion. I could care less how broken the mail clients for other operating
systems are, that's not my problem, mine works fine, even if yours does not.
Just in case it wasn't clear, let's define what "Reply" means:
n 1: a statement (either spoken or written) that is made in
reply to a question or request or criticism or accusation;
"I waited several days for his answer"; "he wrote replies to
several of his critics" [syn: {answer}, {response}]
2: the speech act of continuing a conversational exchange;
"he growled his reply" [syn: {response}] v : reply or
respond to; "She didn't want to answer"; "answer the
question"; "We answered that we would accept the invitation"
[syn: {answer}, {respond}]
Your arrogance and lack of understanding of the basic issues at hand
is beginning to show. You're continuing a discussion on a topic long-dead,
and you aren't creating a warm, welcoming environment for those who are on
this list, and for those who receive a copy of every one of these emails.
Let's re-evaluate that and begin to get back on track here, with Plucker.
Any and all further messages from you on this topic that are sent to
this list will be automatically ignored. Take it off-list, or drop it. This
is not a discussion with a "winner" or a "loser". The points have been made,
the solutions have been suggested, and people are beginning to adhere to
them. Why do you feel it necessary to bring this back up again? I don't.
Let's get back to getting onward with the 1.2 release.
d.
perldoc -qa.j | perl -lpe '($_)=m("(.*)")'
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.1.92 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE9qlC2kRQERnB1rkoRAs/JAJ9EiY6Y+szCpIGwede3NmUPzRgz8QCbBazR
Lvl7vnB/c0S9X22pDNd9Hvo=
=2sQ5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
plucker-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.rubberchicken.org/mailman/listinfo/plucker-list
