Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 05:27:37PM -0500, Paul Gilmartin wrote: > On Sat, 20 Aug 2016 19:07:20 +0200, Tomasz Rola wrote: > > > >I could have written that poor MUAs lead to respondends being unable > >to trim their emails to manageable size ... > > > I've heard of this misbehavior but never

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On Sat, 20 Aug 2016 19:07:20 +0200, Tomasz Rola wrote: > >I could have written that poor MUAs lead to respondends being unable >to trim their emails to manageable size ... > I've heard of this misbehavior but never suffered it. I assumed it was by design for integrity, preventing misquotation

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 10:22:09PM -0400, Phil Smith III wrote: > What the top-posting vs. bottom-posting folks don't seem to recognize is > that both have their uses. Maybe. But choosing just one option is very limiting, like claiming that talking about oneself has its merits and talking about

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

What the top-posting vs. bottom-posting folks don't seem to recognize is that both have their uses. In a business conversation, a thread may go thru 20 exchanges, and then someone new gets added. That person is going to be completely lost without the history to follow up on, and the existing

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 16:16:49 -0400, Gord Tomlin wrote: >On 2016-08-18 15:25, Bill Woodger wrote: >> Gord, other than sounding slightly risque, I have no idea what >> bottom-posting may mean. > Have you heard the nickname for the new British super-airship? >... Personally, I hate bottom-posting,

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On > Behalf Of Charles Mills > Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 1:36 PM > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU > Subject: (External):Re: GMail vs. COBOL > > I get dozens of business e-mails a day and no one, no one in the business

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Charles Mills Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 1:36 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: GMail vs. COBOL I get dozens of business e-mails a day and no one, no one in the business community bottom-post

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

: Thursday, August 18, 2016 4:17 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: GMail vs. COBOL On 2016-08-18 15:25, Bill Woodger wrote: > Gord, other than sounding slightly risque, I have no idea what bottom-posting > may mean. Bottom-posting is placing your reply at the bottom of the message, as

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On 2016-08-18 15:25, Bill Woodger wrote: Gord, other than sounding slightly risque, I have no idea what bottom-posting may mean. Bottom-posting is placing your reply at the bottom of the message, as I did here. Top-posting is placing your reply at the top of the message, as you did with

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

Thanks, Bill, got to that now. Even after reading the manual, it still took time to realise that the quote possibility only emerges once you've already clicked on Reply. The thing is, having got this far, am I still breaking things (topics) in gmail? Gord, other than sounding slightly risque,

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On 2016-08-18 13:09, Bill Godfrey wrote: When replying from the listserv web interface, the way to quote the message you are replying to is to click on the large double-quote icon in the lower right. This message was sent that way. On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:16:09 -0500, Bill Woodger wrote:

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

When replying from the listserv web interface, the way to quote the message you are replying to is to click on the large double-quote icon in the lower right. This message was sent that way. On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 11:16:09 -0500, Bill Woodger wrote: >Well, I was wrong about there being no

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 05:26:25PM +0200, Tomasz Rola wrote: [...] > Hope this helps somebody. Sending via listserv interface to the list's > archive seems to be source of the problem - I have not had time to log > in there and see myself, but according to Bill W. there is no "reply > to" option,

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

Well, I was wrong about there being no "reply" from the listserv.ua.edu. If you go into an archive month, you can reply there (can't work out how to get quoted text, but I can always "reply" in the google group, copy, paste in here, type what else I want (and trim) and "Send Message" from here,

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 08:23:56AM -0400, Gord Tomlin wrote: [...] > For me (I receive the messages with Thunderbird), Paul Gilmartin's > messages also break threads on IBM-MAIN; Gil is active here, so his > posts break lots of threads for me. Interestingly, his posts do not > break threads on

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On 2016-08-17 21:31, zMan wrote: Heck, people reply to existing threads with new topics; This is a pure human behavioral issue, and drives me nuts. -- Regards, Gord Tomlin Action Software International (a division of Mazda Computer Corporation) Tel: (905) 470-7113, Fax: (905) 470-6507

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On 2016-08-18 07:18, Steve Horein wrote: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 11:49 PM, Ed Jaffe wrote: > On 8/17/2016 6:31 PM, zMan wrote: > >> I mean, "When I read the list in GMail, I don't want to see a thread >> broken >> into 27 different ones simply because some folks

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 11:49 PM, Ed Jaffe wrote: > On 8/17/2016 6:31 PM, zMan wrote: > >> I mean, "When I read the list in GMail, I don't want to see a thread >> broken >> into 27 different ones simply because some folks use non-compliant MUAs." >> > > Yes, every

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On 8/17/2016 6:31 PM, zMan wrote: I mean, "When I read the list in GMail, I don't want to see a thread broken into 27 different ones simply because some folks use non-compliant MUAs." Yes, every reply from Bill Woodger starts a new thread. I have not yet examined the headers to understand

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

e the odds that there will be two unconnected threads called "GMail vs. COBOL" at the same time?) I certainly understand the purist argument; maybe it could be optional (though I'd argue that it should be enabled by default). But this is really OT and I misdoubt that GMail devs read th

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 05:02:38PM -0500, Bill Woodger wrote: > And now from the archive, posted as a reply to my last. > Both messages came to my mailbox, unlinked from the thread and from each other. But I have already linked them. I am using mutt, all it takes is four strokes per message -

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

[Default] On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 14:50:29 -0700 (PDT), in bit.listserv.ibm-main Bill Woodger wrote: >As I understand it, when I "reply" from the google groups display, only the >google-groups readers can see it, it doesn't go to the list itself. So you, >Tomasz, can't see

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

And now from the archive, posted as a reply to my last. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

So, to test, do you see the message I posted below? On Tuesday, 16 August 2016 23:50:31 UTC+2, Bill Woodger wrote: > As I understand it, when I "reply" from the google groups display, only the > google-groups readers can see it, it doesn't go to the list itself. So you, > Tomasz, can't see

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 22:51:18 +0200, Tomasz Rola wrote: >On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 12:57:45PM -0400, zMan wrote: >> Tomasz, >> >> I understand. But the MUAs mostly link by Subject: line; > >Uhum, I am not sure what you mean. But if I read you right this >time[0], I was "always" sure the proper way

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 12:57:45PM -0400, zMan wrote: > Tomasz, > > I understand. But the MUAs mostly link by Subject: line; Uhum, I am not sure what you mean. But if I read you right this time[0], I was "always" sure the proper way to link one message to another is by utilising information from

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 12:17:51PM -0500, Bill Woodger wrote: > I use google groups to view the list, and > https://listserv.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=IBM-MAIN to post to the > list. I have email delivery turned off, and do not reply to (the > non-existent) emails from gmail. > > The google groups

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

I use google groups to view the list, and https://listserv.ua.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=IBM-MAIN to post to the list. I have email delivery turned off, and do not reply to (the non-existent) emails from gmail. The google groups presents everything nicely by topic, whether I include Re: at the start

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

Tomasz, I understand. But the MUAs mostly link by Subject: line; I'm suggesting that GMail could do the same, at least for notes classified as "Forums". "We have the technology"... On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Tomasz Rola wrote: > On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 01:54:25PM

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 01:54:25PM -0400, zMan wrote: > Sure would be nice if GMail were half as good at threading as COBOL is at > detecting recursive calls. I see TEN different threads with the same > subject. > > (Yes, I understand Message-ID and that some mailers [human or otherwise] > remove

Re: GMail vs. COBOL

Perhaps now I know what you are talking about :-) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

GMail vs. COBOL

Sure would be nice if GMail were half as good at threading as COBOL is at detecting recursive calls. I see TEN different threads with the same subject. (Yes, I understand Message-ID and that some mailers [human or otherwise] remove it, thus breaking automatic threading, but for discussion