--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ffl_topic_heading_editor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Archer" <rick@> wrote: > > > > > > No. He is someone else who volunteered to correct the thread > > > topic when the content of the thread has morphed into something > > > no longer represented by the topic. This is something we all > > > should do, but it's hard to get people to do it, or to snip > > > unneeded text in their posts. > > > > Is this person then deleting the original > > posts? > > Yes. This is the only we know of to start a new thread in the system > if the author does not. > > > Because that makes it impossible to > > count one's posts using the Yahoo message > > list, since FFL_Topic_Heading_Editor appears > > under the Author heading rather than the > > name of the person who made the post. > > The Yahoo message service is not counting accurately, regardless.
The Message List is accurate. It doesn't count posts, it just lists them. It's the Advanced Search (which does count posts) that isn't always accurate. And > changing the thread should only effect any one individual's posts > occasionally. And they will never be effected if one keeps > headings accurate. "Accurate" is highly subjective with regard to headings. > > He's also snipping way too much context so > > that you have no idea what the post was > > responding to, and he's leaving out some > > of the attributions so you don't even know > > whose post it was or who the person was > > addressing. > > Since all of the reference posts are below, maintaining > substantial reference in the post itself is redundant. There are no reference posts below if you start a new thread, obviously. Look at #155052 and ##155053. There's no context whatsoever. And doing so makes reading > posts difficult -- often necessitating scrolling 5-6 pages > to get to the new post. I don't believe I suggested that huge amounts from the past posts in the exchange should be left in, did I? > If I have been over snipping, I will try to do better. However, one > can simply keep their own posts snipped -- to their own > satisfaction. > > > And of course it completely > > screws up the Yahoo threading feature. > > How so? It creates a new thread with an accurate heading > so people can more easily follow topics they choose to. Having > unrelated heading titles is what screws up the threading system. Often I find I want to follow a thread back even when the topic has changed. And there isn't always a clear dividing line. Threads can morph gradually. If Advanced Search worked on text strings, it wouldn't be so much of a problem, but since it leaves posts out, it's no use at all. > > This is a *terrible* idea, Rick. How many > > people complained about morphed threads, > > two? > > Why not try it for several weeks. If after two weeks, > people find FFL is not easer to read and navigate, we > can abandon this effort. How many people complained about morphed threads, two? I have *never* had any problem reading and navigating FFL the way it's been up to now. I can't understand why anyone is having trouble with it. At the very least, you should have warned us you were going to start this so we could begin keeping track of our posts by some other method than via the Yahoo Message List. This should have been announced ahead of time, not sprung on us out of the blue. What a mess. > Or, better yet, people can simple create accurate headings for their > posts. And snip them concisely. >
