On Tue, 2010-01-26 at 15:49 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > On Tue, 2010-01-26 at 20:05 +0100, Alpar Juttner wrote: > > Hi Patrik, > > > > Could you elaborate in which respect top posting is worse than simply > > substituting the whole original message with '[...]'? > > Certainly. The whole original message was deleted because I didn't want > to answer it in the form it was presented (even assuming I would have > answered it anyway; I actually stopped reading as soon as I realized it > was a hijack). My comment has nothing whatever to do with the content of > the message but with how it was posted.
It occurs to me that you might have been asking if it would have been OK for the hijacker to delete the original message contents and proceed from there (if you were being ironic, it wasn't clear). The answer is no. Threads are defined by an RFC which specifies that certain headers (In-Reply-To is one, there are others) are to be used to indicate relationships between messages. That's why changing the Subject line is not good enough. Evo actually has a prefence option to allow the Subject line to be used as a fallback, since some broken mailers out there don't follow the RFC correctly, but since that wasn't the case here the option doesn't apply. poc _______________________________________________ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
