... of a thread containing 43 replies on actually various problems, all belonging to the thread "[ANNOUNCE] VDR developer version 1.3.31"?
Come on guys, it shouldn't be too difficult for people dealing with VDR to start a copmpletely new thread when one has an issue with a new version (replying and only changing the subject makes things only worse) instead of replying over and over again to a message which was intended as the subject says, an ANNOUNCEMENT. It's simply a pain to follow such a thread when the topic changes all over. Such a pity that it's not possible for the author of a message to check some flag preventing replies, I'm almost sure Klaus would have turned on such a switch on these anouncements.
@Klaus: want to try including a notice in every such original announcement, asking people to start new threads with specific problems related to the new release?
Regards, Lucian
Lucian Muresan wrote:
... of a thread containing 43 replies on actually various problems, all belonging to the thread "[ANNOUNCE] VDR developer version 1.3.31"?
Come on guys, it shouldn't be too difficult for people dealing with VDR to start a copmpletely new thread when one has an issue with a new version (replying and only changing the subject makes things only worse) instead of replying over and over again to a message which was intended as the subject says, an ANNOUNCEMENT. It's simply a pain to follow such a thread when the topic changes all over. Such a pity that it's not possible for the author of a message to check some flag preventing replies, I'm almost sure Klaus would have turned on such a switch on these anouncements.
Well, maybe the "Followup-to:" header could help here, but I'm not sure whether there is one that prevents any replies to a message. "Followup-to: poster" explicitly directs replies to the original author - but that's not what I would want. Are there other keywords for this that could achieve the wanted goal?
Plus: I'm not sure whether a "Followup-to:" header would correctly make it through the mailing list software. So for a test I'm setting "Followup-to: poster" in this message. ANYBODY REPLYING TO THIS MESSAGE PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU SEND YOUR REPLY TO THE LIST INSTEAD OF ME PRIVATELY! (just capitalized this to make sure it gets read - didn't mean to get loud ;-)
@Klaus: want to try including a notice in every such original announcement, asking people to start new threads with specific problems related to the new release?
Do you really believe this would change anything? ;-)
Klaus
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Klaus Schmidinger (KS) wrote:
KS> Plus: I'm not sure whether a "Followup-to:" header would correctly KS> make it through the mailing list software. So for a test I'm setting KS> "Followup-to: poster" in this message. ANYBODY REPLYING TO THIS MESSAGE KS> PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU SEND YOUR REPLY TO THE LIST INSTEAD OF ME PRIVATELY! KS> (just capitalized this to make sure it gets read - didn't mean to get loud KS> ;-)
replied and checked that to: is set to the lists address. (this message is intended to be a test)
but: would you want to gett all the replies?
Sergei
Sergei Haller wrote:
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005, Klaus Schmidinger (KS) wrote:
KS> Plus: I'm not sure whether a "Followup-to:" header would correctly KS> make it through the mailing list software. So for a test I'm setting KS> "Followup-to: poster" in this message. ANYBODY REPLYING TO THIS MESSAGE KS> PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU SEND YOUR REPLY TO THE LIST INSTEAD OF ME PRIVATELY! KS> (just capitalized this to make sure it gets read - didn't mean to get loud KS> ;-)
replied and checked that to: is set to the lists address. (this message is intended to be a test)
but: would you want to gett all the replies?
No, definitely not!
What I would like to achieve is that no replies are sent to such a posting at all - at least those who try to reply should be confronted with something that tells them like "don't reply to this posting".
Klaus
Klaus Schmidinger a écrit :
Sergei Haller wrote:
but: would you want to gett all the replies?
No, definitely not!
What I would like to achieve is that no replies are sent to such a posting at all - at least those who try to reply should be confronted with something that tells them like "don't reply to this posting".
It seems it's time to start a vdr-annouce list, with different settings than the current one (replies directed to the list, but also rejected by the list ?). Only original posts by anyone (core or plugin or add-on developpers) would be accepted there. Or specific subscribing would be required to post to this list.
Nicolas Huillard wrote:
Klaus Schmidinger a écrit :
Sergei Haller wrote:
but: would you want to gett all the replies?
No, definitely not!
What I would like to achieve is that no replies are sent to such a posting at all - at least those who try to reply should be confronted with something that tells them like "don't reply to this posting".
It seems it's time to start a vdr-annouce list, with different settings than the current one (replies directed to the list, but also rejected by the list ?). Only original posts by anyone (core or plugin or add-on developpers) would be accepted there. Or specific subscribing would be required to post to this list.
I'd like to avoid that - not yet another list.
Klaus
I demand that Klaus Schmidinger may or may not have written...
Lucian Muresan wrote:
[snip]
It's simply a pain to follow such a thread when the topic changes all over. Such a pity that it's not possible for the author of a message to check some flag preventing replies, I'm almost sure Klaus would have turned on such a switch on these anouncements.
Well, maybe the "Followup-to:" header could help here, but I'm not sure whether there is one that prevents any replies to a message. "Followup-to: poster" explicitly directs replies to the original author
... in newsgroup context.
In list context, Mail-Followup-To and Mail-Reply-To are useful, but support for these isn't (yet?) sufficiently widespread. (The software which I'm using supports M-F-T but not M-R-T.)
- but that's not what I would want. Are there other keywords for this that
could achieve the wanted goal?
I don't believe that there is one. Even if there were, it would have to be a "should" rather than a "must".
Plus: I'm not sure whether a "Followup-to:" header would correctly make it through the mailing list software. [...]
It does. It just doesn't necessarily work.
@Klaus: want to try including a notice in every such original announcement, asking people to start new threads with specific problems related to the new release?
Do you really believe this would change anything? ;-)
No. OTOH, some carefully-crafted flames will certainly help ;-)
[snip]
I demand that Nicolas Huillard may or may not have written...
Klaus Schmidinger a écrit :
Sergei Haller wrote:
but: would you want to gett all the replies?
No, definitely not! What I would like to achieve is that no replies are sent to such a posting at all - at least those who try to reply should be confronted with something that tells them like "don't reply to this posting".
It seems it's time to start a vdr-annouce list, with different settings than the current one (replies directed to the list, but also rejected by the list ?).
Only original posts by anyone (core or plugin or add-on developpers) would be accepted there.
There's a problem with that: if your mail software doesn't add In-Reply-To or References *or* you can delete those headers, you get to post 'followups'.
Or specific subscribing would be required to post to this list.
Or moderation...
In 4DA4231EE4%linux@youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk, Darren Salt wrote:
I demand that Klaus Schmidinger may or may not have written...
Lucian Muresan wrote:
[snip]
It's simply a pain to follow such a thread when the topic changes all over. Such a pity that it's not possible for the author of a message to check some flag preventing replies, I'm almost sure Klaus would have turned on such a switch on these anouncements.
Well, maybe the "Followup-to:" header could help here, but I'm not sure whether there is one that prevents any replies to a message. "Followup-to: poster" explicitly directs replies to the original author
... in newsgroup context.
In list context, Mail-Followup-To and Mail-Reply-To are useful, but support for these isn't (yet?) sufficiently widespread. (The software which I'm using supports M-F-T but not M-R-T.)
I know I'm guilty of contributing to one of these announce threads recently, so sorry for that, but at least mine wasn't a 1st generation reply.
What about using the above headers to redirect to an auto-responder set up to ask the author to change the subject and resend to the list.
Or just putting something like, "PLEASE CHANGE THE SUBJECT IF YOU REPLY TO THIS" in capitals at the top of every announcement might help a lot.
Tony Houghton wrote: [...]
What about using the above headers to redirect to an auto-responder set up to ask the author to change the subject and resend to the list.
Or just putting something like, "PLEASE CHANGE THE SUBJECT IF YOU REPLY TO THIS" in capitals at the top of every announcement might help a lot.
Don't know if that should be the solution, but if asking people something, then this should be to *really* start a new thread instead of changing the subject, which would only cause a mess in clients capable of displaying a thread view. The changed subject, if replied to a thread message would be sorted in the same thread. Maybe it's too fancy, maybe people just aren't used or even aware of thread views and just sort by date or subject... Or maybe it's too much of an effort having to also fill in the list address when starting a completly new message, as compared to just hit reply and (maybe) edit the subject...
Lucian Muresan wrote:
Tony Houghton wrote: [...]
What about using the above headers to redirect to an auto-responder set up to ask the author to change the subject and resend to the list.
Or just putting something like, "PLEASE CHANGE THE SUBJECT IF YOU REPLY TO THIS" in capitals at the top of every announcement might help a lot.
Don't know if that should be the solution, but if asking people something, then this should be to *really* start a new thread instead of changing the subject, which would only cause a mess in clients capable of displaying a thread view. The changed subject, if replied to a thread message would be sorted in the same thread. Maybe it's too fancy, maybe people just aren't used or even aware of thread views and just sort by date or subject... Or maybe it's too much of an effort having to also fill in the list address when starting a completly new message, as compared to just hit reply and (maybe) edit the subject...
To me intact threads are very essential. I have so many messages in my inbox that I can only handle them efficiently if they use proper subjects and are properly threaded. People who don't use proper subjects, post deeply into existing threads with totally unrelated stuff or break threads need not wonder if their message gets lost...
Klaus
-
Darren Salt -
Klaus Schmidinger -
Lucian Muresan -
Nicolas Huillard -
Sergei Haller -
Tony Houghton