On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 09:03 -0700, Richard Vickery wrote:
Fwiw, you ought to be placing your comments here in the thread
"boot,
linux text" as this is where Dave's comments are.
He did, as I did, replied directly to a post. That's where *replies*
belong, to the post they're in response to. You don't reply to one
message by replying to another. Particularly with tangential
information.
If two different threads appear to belong together, then sure it may
reasonable to join them together some how. But they don't need to be.
If the poster has branched off another thread, that may be on purpose.
I didn't see the connection. I certainly don't recall all the names in
all the vaguely similar threads, to be able to instantly recognise what
is the same conversation, or what is coincidentally similar things being
discussed by different people (as is often the case - one thread being
someone resolving a problem, and another being other people going off on
a tangent that won't help the original poster, or just discussing the
same thing through sheer coincidence). I don't go around trying to join
disparate threads together, sometimes they're meant to be separate. If
someone has broken a thread, let them reap the consequences.
If you are trying to resolve an issue, it does you harm if you break the
thread, and start discussing the same thing in several apparently
different threads (that's "you" the original poster, most particularly,
but it also replies to those helping out). If it's a reply, do it as a
reply. Don't start new threads. And don't change subject lines without
due care.
On the other hand, if some part of someone's discussion catches your
interest, but your responses are not intended to help in that thread,
then creating a new thread is the right thing to do. You don't destroy
their thread, that way. It can carry on doing what it was meant to do.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -r
2.6.27.25-78.2.56.fc9.i686
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored. I
read messages from the public lists.