Re: CONLANG/ZBB crossover (WAS: CONLANG article deleted from Wikipedia)

>Philip Newton writes:
> >...
> > (Not to mention that my Usenet client does threading, whereas most
> > forums I've seen don't -- they just dump entire conversations into one
> > window, much like Gmail, without making it clear who replied to whom.)
>
>And the confusing thing is that in contrast to mails where the correct
>threading depends on correct mail client implementations (References
>an In-Reply-To headers) and subject lines etc., which all tend to be
>partially broken, any forum software has ultimate knowledge about the
>threading because all replies are under its own control.  Absurd.
>
>**Henrik
I may be missing something here, but what the heck are you talking about? I
haven't seen a single online forum that would jumble all messages together -
everything *must* be in a thred. Or is it thred-internal organization you're
after? I'm not sure if that's feasible in forums, but not really on mailing
lists either, since it's commonplace to reply to more than one person, or
point, in a single post, and there's 99% of the time a general "reply"
option in addition to all the "quote" options anyway. Strictly speaking, one
could just as well quote multiple peeple in a single Usenet message too. And
if there exists software that can deduce from the actual content of the
message who and what is it in reply to, I haven't met hir yet :)

In forums where going off topic (which isn't actually even a prerequisite
for composite replies) is scowled on, peeps just start new threds when
needed. I suppose you could criticize that then you couldn't see which thred
spawned which, but I don't really see how useful that would be... Maybe it's
just user culture differences at play here.

John Vertical

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live Messenger - kivuttoman viestinnän puolestapuhuja.
http://www.communicationevolved.com/fi-fi/

Replies