Using Thunderbird for Usenet

[george [dicegeorge]]

changed subject for experiemnt

will this thread with its ordinal title: "Re using Thunderbird for Usenet" or thread under its new subject name?

Graeme wrote:

[Adrian]

"george [dicegeorge]" gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Get your usenet client to show you all headers. There's a line in there - "References:" - which shows the threading hierarchy.

If it was just on the subject line, then different languages or setups of clients would regularly break the threading just by adding the "Re:" reply prefix in different ways, let alone a user changing the title for a sub-thread drift.

[george [dicegeorge]]

In Thunderbird when I click the [Subject] column header this message is filed alphabetically under subject:

its not grouped along with "Re using Thunderbird for Usenet" But, if I understand Graeme correctly, in some newsreaders it will be grouped along with its initial subject name?

[g]

george [dicegeorge] wrote:

[Huge]

In newsreaders that work correctly, the Subject change is irrelevant, since the threading is done by the References header.

Please don't top post.

[John Rumm]

It could be if you wanted...

If you click a column header then it will do a simple sort in order on that column (click a second time for reverse order).

If you click on the "thread gadget" column header then it will thread properly based on the message references.

However, by using options on the View | Sort By menu, you can also do tricks like sort by any column of your choice, but also retain the threaded nature. So sort by "received" with threading on, will pop a thread to the end of the list each time a response to it is received.

[The Natural Philosopher]

MSGID usually

[The Natural Philosopher]

In my thunderbid, its filed under the original thread, because I use thread viewing.

It is here.

[george [dicegeorge]]

Thanks - I hadnt noticed the Thunderbird thread gadget column before, I can see it will be useful sometimes!

[g]

[Graeme]

In message , "george [dicegeorge]" writes

Yes, using Turnpike, your message appears within the same thread, as it should.

[John Rumm]

I find the \ keystroke handy for collapsing all the threads back to just their titles.

[Adrian C]

I tried it a few weeks ago on XP. It needs work on the interface IMO.

Also unfortunately, Pan doesn't handle the reception or transmission of 'format flowed' plain text though, so a pain if you are reediting text in it - ye have to keep hitting the Rewrap button to insert a line break after 74 (or whatever number of) characters. Then when text entered like that is quoted in various clients, the end result is a mess.

I hope they work on fixing the above.

At the moment, Pan's strengths seems to be in downloading binaries in usenet, and scheduling and managing these activities from different servers.

[Bob Eager]

I've not noticed that problem. But the XP version may be older - I'm using (looks....) 0.133, on FreeBSD.

[BillW50]

I am running into the same problem with Thunderbird as I always have. And the problem is unbearable in very busy newsgroups. Sure in Thunderbird you can setup a rule to automatically mark any thread you post in and mark them as watched.

Well one, the rule isn't always being applied in huge newsgroups. It is like TB is getting confused. Worse, it is having a problem reading all of the headers as well. As the status bar instead of going from left to right is jumping all over the place. This newsgroup on this server has over 12,000 posts, btw.

And now TB can indeed mark the threads you had replied in as watched (when it actually works). But some threads contain hundreds of posts. And these huge threads, I am not interested in reading all of them. Just the sub-threads I had taken part in.

And it just happened again today. I thought I replied to all of them and I then fired up OE6. And instantly I found two posts that were replies to my posts. And OE6 not only can mark whole threads like TB can, but it can rather only mark sub-threads you are only interested in. So you can find them instantly.

So maybe people can understand why I don't find TB (or other ones I have tried) very attractive. As OE6 works well and very quick. And you can search past read posts very quickly as well.

[Rod]

I *always* reply to Yahoo group posts from the web page and use the [Reply] button on the specific post to which I am replying - or use the [Reply via a web post] button. Sometimes this does indeed require clicking on [Messages in this topic] and playing about to ensure I am on the right post. Maybe other techniques work, but I have never felt comfortable that I am doing the right thing.

For new threads I do use the [Start a new topic] link from an emailed post - and then post from the web page. Or the [Start Topic] button on the web page.

I really do not see how replying by email ever works - and judging by what I see, it doesn't seem to.

It's a rotten system that makes sensible posting so difficult for so many posters, but for some subjects it is the only place to go.

[Graeme]

In message , Rod writes

I am afraid that we see this subject from opposite ends. I cannot abide replying via a web page, and cannot understand how or why people do. I always reply via e-mail, and it works.

[John Rumm]

One thing to watch is that message filters apply to individual groups and not a news server as a whole, so you may need to duplicate some filters between groups.

You can kill the sub threads you don't want (Shift+k)

I don't find this a problem personally, but I expect there is a difference in the way we are using it. I have it watch any thread I have posted to, and when catching up I will use watched with unread, Hitting next jumps me straight to the next new post. If I find a sub thread wandering off somewhere I don't want to go, then I just kill that sub thread. The result is I see any replies of interest straight away, and don't have to wade through sub threads that don't interest me.

There is a slight bug in 3.0.4 though that can flag a thread as having new posts when they occur in a killed sub thread. That means it appears on the top level view underlined, but is skipped over when you do a next.

Each to his own I guess.

[Rod]

Happily grant you the right to do that - to do absolutely anything you like - so long as there is sensible threading! :-)

Can't say I like the web post thing, but it works for me.

And don't get me onto the inability of most Yahoo group posters to snip. Or the way the system pushes people towards top posting. Or the ludicrous backgrounds and pictures people insist on adding.

And George, just remember that Yahoo group emails are not the same as Usenet posts.

[Graeme]

Agreed!

I despise HTML posting, wherever I see it. Plain text rules.

I'm very well aware of the difference, but much prefer to receive my Yahoo group posts exactly as I see Usenet posts. No top posting, plenty of snippage, unbroken sig sep, NO HTML, neatly sorted into groups, then properly threaded. I like any thread to which I have contributed to be automatically marked as 'interesting', one click facility to keep threads or posts forever, mark as read etc.

[dennis]

Its lucky you aren't using astranews then, it has >135,000 posts.

Even datemas' free service has >35,000

[Adrian C]

It's the same in the Windows build of 0.133, and looking at your headers, your build of Pan as well.

FYI The format=flowed FAQ

thing was cooked up originally by Eudora, but it's not absolutely compulsory that other news clients respect it, but the majority of them do.