[vox] Re: [vox-announce] New mailing list rules

[ME]

Henry House said:
> På tisdag, 25 maj 2004, skrev Ken Bloom:
>> >	 {+3. Do not start a new thread by replying to an unrelated
>> >	 message Do not post a message that starts a new line of
>> >	 discussion (thread) by replying to someone else's post and
>> >	 changing the subject. Instead, use the 'compose new message'
>> >	 or whatever equivalent command your mailer provides.
>>
>> The rules should probably mention the fact that most vox-* users
>> use mail clients that can arrange threading into a nice tree to make
>> it easy to follow the discussion and see who replied to who. Point out
>> that this is annoying because it defeats this feature of the email
>> client. (It's most likely that the people who reply to messages to
>> start a new thread do so because they aren't aware of email clients
>> that organize messages by thread, and they don't run such an email
>> client.)
>
> I probably should mention this, since it is the motivation for the rule.
> Ken: I inserted your explanatory paragraph, with a few modifications. This
> section now reads:
>
> ----
> 	Do not post a message that starts a new line of discussion (thread) by
> replying to someone else's post and changing the subject. Instead, use the
> 'compose new message' or whatever equivalent command your mailer
> provides.<p>
>
> 	An example of this is asking a question, "How can I learn how to run a
> web server on Linux?" by replying to a message on "Re: Compiling
> PostgreSQL
> from source on Debian". The two posts are completely unrelated. On the
> other
> hand, it is a good practice to change the subject line when the discussion
> in a thread drifts to a new (but related) topic.<p>
>
> 	A good test it this: did you quote relevant discussion in your new
> message and author a response to it? If the previous discussion was
> irrelevant to your new post, then you should start a new thread using
> 'compose new message', not 'reply'.<p>
>
> 	The reason for this rule is that most vox* readers use mail clients that
> can arrange message threads into a nice tree using the <tt>References</tt>
> header of each message to make it easy to follow the discussion and see
> who
> replied to whom. When you break this rule by using 'reply' when you should
> use 'compose new message', you confuse and annoy these people because it
> defeats this feature of the e-mail clients and the <tt>References</tt>
> headers of messages. It is likely that the people who mistakenly reply to
> messages to start a new thread do so because they aren't aware of email
> clients that organize messages by thread, and they don't run such an email
> client.<p>
> ----
>
> This section is now dangerously long though. Can anyone suggest how to
> condense it?

State there are reasons for respecting your peers and following this
method. For an explanation, check out (this link here)

[Where "this link here" is a link which describes what you mention in
great detail.]