On Wednesday 11 June 2008, Hal Martin wrote: [snip]
> I'm sorry, but I fail to see why the above example mentioned > qualifies as Thread Hijacking. He started a new thread to pose his > question, and, if anything, was only being indirect in asking it. No, he did not start a new thread. Other wise why does his mail have this header; In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [snip] > He *did* compose a new message, there is no Re: in the header and no > other content in the message. That's not how you determine if a thread has been hijacked. The Re: is simply a subject line and can be edited. Deleting all content from a previous post is also not it, as thread-aware mail clients use extended headers to do it, specifically In-Reply-To and References -- Alan McKinnon alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
