[Robotgroup] Thread Hijacking --Part Deux-B

Wed Apr 23 11:59:59 PDT 2008

David, you are spot-on. I'd like to add:

Most young people will roundly ignore what Vern wrote. That is  
because the changes he asks for do not benefit them (as far as they  
can see) but someone else. It is quicker to reply than to copy the  
old contents to a new email.

Most very bright people will do it their own way because either 1)  
obviously their way is best, or 2) they forget the rules, or 3) they  
are so bright that they are stupid.

Some people really are stupid.

Some people argue for the sake of entertainment or to prove something  
which ultimately doesn't matter to everyone.

Now think about how many shades of variations of the above are  
possible and you will quickly realize that training people to use  
email a certain way is just another example of trying to herd cats.

And yet in principle I do agree with Vern.

Take care,
Les

On 23 Apr 2008, at 1:25 PM, David Nunez wrote:

> IMHO:
>
> If you are overwhelmed w/ mailing list articles, then you should ask
> yourself whether or not you are truly getting value out of the mailing
> lists you are subscribed to.  I.e. figure out your hourly worth and
> then decide whether or not you are getting enough ROI on your time to
> spend sorting through "thousands of email" in the off chance you're
> gonna find that one golden nugget in there.
>
> Last time I checked (maybe a year ago) I was literally getting over
> 7000 pieces of email flying through my inbox (if you include SPAM)
> every day.  I have dozens of email addresses that get usable mail that
> all pipe to one inbox.  I have a rather aggressive ruleset to deal (or
> not deal) with incoming email.
>
> So I only see about 20 of them a day after all my filtering... which,
> when I'm good, I can dispose of in a few minutes.
>
> I'm happy to share this process with anyone, but arguably, I'm really
> not good at email currently have about 40 messages requiring action
> (some from over a month ago) and FYI it's highly Mac OS X specific.
>
> RG mailing list traffic goes to its own bucket which I check only if
> "dorkbot" is mentioned in a message (i.e. a rule bubbles it up) or b.
> I have a few minutes of idle time to kill.  Messages older than a
> couple weeks are automatically removed.
>
> I dont (usually) complain about information overload because I know
> the answer to my problem is there, should I choose to take it:
> unsubscribe and delete.
>
> And in an ultimate statement of projection and pot... kettle...
> black... : it takes enormous courage to prioritize; being
> "overwhelmed" is a matter of having extremely poor skill sets to make
> decisions.
>
> This is all to say: Rather than trying to change everyone else's
> behavior, it's probably easier and more effective to optimize your
> own.
>
> I'm going to go hide under my rock, now, like a good troll should.
>
> david
>
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 1:03 PM, Vern Graner <vern at txis.com> wrote:
>> brooksdesign wrote:
>>> So if I alter the subject line that does not start a new thread?
>>> -brooks
>>
>>  Nope. Its a hi-jack. Here's a rather long winded description I  
>> authored
>>  for another list I'm on where people wanted to know more about it:
>>
>>  =======================================
>>  Many people do not know that email is threaded by information in the
>>  *header* of the email.
>>
>>  As for how email is threaded, the difference is in the *headers*  
>> of the
>>  emails and is only apparent when viewed by a mail reader that  
>> respects
>>  the headers and displays them appropriately. When you hit reply, a
>>  proper mail handler says "this header ID is in reply to this  
>> header ID"
>>  and then files it in the appropriate thread for the reader. For some
>>  background on this, you can have a look here:
>>
>>  http://linux.sgms-centre.com/misc/netiquette.php
>>
>>  from which this is a relevant portion:
>>  ------------------ CLIP -----------------
>>  When starting a new thread don't just reply to a message sent by  
>> someone
>>  else and clear the subject line. Not all e-mail and news clients  
>> behave
>>  like yours and will thread messages correctly based on the
>>  "Message-ID:", "In-Reply-To:" and "References:" headers embedded  
>> in the
>>  messages. Only programs which don't comply with Internet  
>> standards sort
>>  messages by subject and call that "threading". When you simply  
>> change
>>  the subject of a message, all of the threading information remains
>>  intact and your new "thread" simply continues at the end of the  
>> old one.
>>  This is called thread hijacking.
>>
>>  By doing this, you're shooting yourself in the foot twice over.  
>> First of
>>  all, people following a thread don't want to see unrelated messages
>>  cropping up in the middle of it. The most complacent will just  
>> delete
>>  your message without reading it, others will killfile you, some  
>> having
>>  complained to you asking you to learn how to post. Secondly,  
>> those who
>>  aren't interested in the hijacked thread and who have set their  
>> programs
>>  to ignore it won't even see your message.
>>
>>  If you want to start a new thread then use your mailer's/ 
>> newsreader's
>>  "New Message" function. This will start a fresh thread of your own
>>  without any traces of previous threads.
>>  ------------------ /CLIP -----------------
>>
>>  and here:
>>
>>  http://home.nyc.rr.com/computertaijutsu/linfaq.html
>>
>>  from which this is a relevant portion:
>>  ------------------ CLIP -----------------
>>  Don't hijack threads. Thread hijacking is when you want to post a  
>> new
>>  subject, simply delete the previous subject line, put in your new
>>  subject, write your email and send it. If you have a totally new
>>  subject, then write a new email--don't just take a previous post at
>>  random, delete its subject, put in your own, and write an email.  
>> Thread
>>  hijacking is a nuisance for those who set up Mutt, for example, to
>>  follow threads. If someone is not following thread x and deletes the
>>  entire thread, and you have simply changed the subject line, that  
>> person
>>  won't see your question. For an example see this picture One poster
>>  simply changed the subject line from Hallo to everybody to Is
>>  linguistics OT at all? However, in an email client like mutt, it  
>> becomes
>>  part of the same thread.
>>  If you are replying to a previous email, but feel that the  
>> subject line
>>  should be changed, then, if you put in your new subject, add (was  
>> old
>>  subject.) For instance, if a discussion about distros is turning  
>> into a
>>  discussion about burning ISO's you might, in your subject line put
>>  burning ISO's (Was distro discussion)
>>  ------------------ /CLIP -----------------
>>
>>  In case you're interested in the "nuts and bolts" of exactly how
>>  threading is done, here's a quick description of the process:
>>
>>  ------------------- CLIP ------------------
>>  References: Message Threading
>>
>>  (Note that you usually won't add a References: field by hand. It's
>>  maintained automatically -- for instance, by Jerry's updated  
>> replcomps
>>  file.)
>>
>>  USENET news articles have had a References: field for a long  
>> time. In
>>  email, though, it's only been popular for a few years. References:
>>  describes the thread (chain, series) of messages that "came  
>> before" the
>>  one you're reading. Each message on the Internet has a unique
>>  identification number that's kept in the Message-ID: field.  
>> References:
>>  is a list of the message-ids from previous messages in this  
>> thread. When
>>  you compose a new message and send it, MH (or the MTA) adds the
>>  Message-ID: field. When someone replies to that message, the  
>> user's MUA
>>  will create a References: field and copy the original message-id  
>> into
>>  it. If someone else replies to that reply, this References: field  
>> gets
>>  the previous references, plus the previous message-id. And so on.
>>
>>  An example should make this easier to see. Let's look at a thread  
>> with
>>  three messages. user-a sends a message to user-b. This original  
>> message
>>  header might have:
>>
>>  From: user-a
>>  To: user-b
>>  Subject: something
>>  Message-ID: <123 at abc.edu>
>>
>>  Now user-b replies to user-a. The reply header looks like:
>>
>>  From: user-b
>>  To: user-a
>>  Subject: Re: something
>>  References: <123 at abc.edu>
>>  Message-ID: <246 at abc.edu>
>>
>>  The third message in this thread is from user-a to user-b, with a  
>> copy
>>  to user-c. user-a also decides to change the subject:
>>
>>  From: user-a
>>  To: user-b
>>  cc: user-c
>>  Subject: Another thing (was: Re: something)
>>  References: <123 at abc.edu> <246 at abc.edu>
>>  Message-ID: <789 at abc.edu>
>>
>>  The References: field will keep getting longer as this thread  
>> goes on.
>>  It lets anyone find all the messages in the thread by searching  
>> for the
>>  message-ids (with pick --message-id, for instance). By default,  
>> MH 6.8.3
>>  doesn't handle References:, but you can add that to your  
>> replcomps file.
>>  -------------------/CLIP ------------------
>>
>>  Note- The above is from:
>>  http://www.ics.uci.edu/~mh/book/mh/hea.htm
>>
>>  Hopefully this will give you some background on this issue and  
>> how it's
>>  not just me being picky, it is a problem for lots of people that use
>>  real, threaded mail readers.
>>
>>  :)
>>
>>  Vern
>>
>>  PS: I swear I'm not a looney! :)
>>
>>
>>
>>  --
>>  Vern Graner CNE/CNA/SSE    | "If the network is down, then you're
>>  Senior Systems Engineer    | obviously incompetent so why are we
>>  Texas Information Services | paying you? Of course, if the network
>>  http://www.txis.com        | is up, then we obviously don't need
>>  Austin Office 512 328-8947 | you, so why are we paying you?" (c)VLG
>>  _______________________________________________
>>  Robotgroup mailing list
>>  Robotgroup at puremagic.com
>>  http://lists.puremagic.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/robotgroup
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Robotgroup mailing list
> Robotgroup at puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/robotgroup