-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Wednesday 2006-05-03 at 07:01 -0500, James F. Pirtle wrote:

Thank you. But this is only a partial solution I fear. The contents of the "to" field and "cc" show the intended recipient(s). No mention of the list appears. But the message still ends up here.

How do you have your kmail set up? Does it send directly to your ISP smtp server, do you send to your local postfix, what? - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFEWKrEtTMYHG2NR9URAjP/AKCMKD5EhDlCWCJ3w5v+EnWN/4Wr1gCfSt9i gMiGnxvEaY7y/7AZ8cPatL4= =2nFv -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Wednesday 03 May 2006 08:12, Gil Weber wrote: <snip> Hi again, Gil. Hi All. This is the one generated when I tapped the 'l' key. So the 'r' went directly to you, Gil, whereas this one was automatically addressed to the list. I'll leave explanations/suggestions to others since I'm not a real KMail expert. ;-) regards, Carl

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Wednesday 2006-05-03 at 10:08 -0400, Damon Register wrote:

Am I correct in thinking this thread is connected with the one with subject "May 13 election"?

I believe so. If we could have a look at his full headers before the list server strips them, we could perhaps help a bit more, but only the list owner can do that. James, if you send an email with copy to me, for instance, would that copy get sent, or only to the list? - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFEWL4WtTMYHG2NR9URAhXhAJ0cdj0yEF6QKiFwEchFNG10yxHRlgCffB95 Ut90F0oPZ4SDSbOOu736O04= =K8u5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On Wed May 3 2006 9:48 am, Carl Hartung wrote:

On Wednesday 03 May 2006 08:12, Gil Weber wrote: <snip>

Hi again, Gil. Hi All.

This is the one generated when I tapped the 'l' key. So the 'r' went directly to you, Gil, whereas this one was automatically addressed to the list.

I'll leave explanations/suggestions to others since I'm not a real KMail expert. ;-)

regards,

Carl

Carl, I did receive both of your e-mails. But here's what happened when I tried replying to **this** e-mail you just sent to the list. I first tried tapping "r" in reply to this message and it addressed only to the list. I then tapped "l" in reply and it too was addressed only to the list. Neither "r" nor "l" would go back to you in the same way that you replied directly to my original post. But, here's what I just discovered. If the incoming e-mail from the list also has a line in the header that says reply to: (as my posts to the list do) then and **only** then will the "r" and "l" make a difference. In one case I **do** get a reply to the sender and in the other I get a reply to the list. However, if there is no reply to: line in the header (as in the case of your e-mails and many others on the list) then there is no difference between tapping "r" and "l" Or is this an annomolly with my KMail set-up? Gil

On Wednesday 03 May 2006 12:06, Matthew Stringer wrote: <snip> You just hijacked a thread, Matthew. That means you replied to an existing post and just changed the subject line. This inserts your comment into the middle of a current thread... very annoying. When you want to post something, compose a new message from scratch and enter the list address (this case: suse-linux-e@suse.com) by hand. *Don't* just click reply and change the subject. regards, Carl

Matthew Stringer wrote:

On Wednesday 03 May 2006 17:16, Carl Hartung wrote:

...

On Wednesday 03 May 2006 12:06, Matthew Stringer wrote: <snip>

You just hijacked a thread, Matthew. That means you replied to an existing post and just changed the subject line. This inserts your comment into the middle of a current thread... very annoying.

Carl

Erm, what's the difference, and why is it annoying?

I'd just re-installed my PC and thus didn't have the original email to reply to.

It is getting increasingly complicated posting to this list, it seems that no matter what you do someone will find fault and complain.

Matthew

The difference is: a thread hijacked: Re:[SLE] strange posts |-Re:[SLE] strange posts | |-Re:[SLE] strange posts |-Re:[SLE] strange posts |-Re:[SLE] strange posts | |-Re:[SLE] cut n paste | |-Re:[SLE] cut n paste |-Re:[SLE] strange posts a thread not hijacked: Re:[SLE] strange posts |-Re:[SLE] strange posts | |-Re:[SLE] strange posts |-Re:[SLE] strange posts |-Re:[SLE] strange posts |-Re:[SLE] strange posts Re:[SLE] cut n paste |-Re:[SLE] cut n paste That is what you see if you use Threaded View of a list. If you are following the thread then it does not make sense that suddenly "cut n paste" pops up in a thread of "strange posts". Mail from a list is best viewed per thread. If you have sort you inbox just by date then of course you will not understand what Carl was complaining about. Hope that clears it a bit. Ulf Rasch

On Wednesday 03 May 2006 13:34, Matthew Stringer wrote:

Fair enough, this is the hardest list in the known universe to post to, every time I click send someone gets pissed off.

Hey hold on there!!! Don't include me in that group!! Dolt!! <grin> (I guess you're right)

On Wednesday 03 May 2006 18:34, Matthew Stringer wrote:

...

Fair enough, this is the hardest list in the known universe to post to, every time I click send someone gets pissed off.

I've got to remember not to top post, make sure my mail client adds > infront of the old mail, remember to ensure that my x-threads aren't upsetting anyone. Make sure that when I reply, I'm replying to the list and not an individual who posted to the list before. No HTML or no rich text, if I have a sig it has to be correctly formatted and without any religious overtones. My spelling and grammar have to be correct. I must also ensure that replies are <snipped> as much as possible as folks don't have the bandwidth to download messages bigger than 5KB! Can't post anything that's 'off topic' or a 'repost' and ensure that any comments about Microsoft are kept to digs and criticisms otherwise I accept that world war 3 will shortely commence!

Did I miss anything?

Matthew

These "rules" as they are called were in place long before you (or I, and I have been a member since around 1998-99) joined the list and have served to help cut down on some of the posts to the list. Since this list has thousands of people subscribed to it and can generate over 200 emails a day every little bit helps. And yes there are still people on this list that are -forced- to use metered dial-up so <snipping> out parts you are not answering and -not- using html does help their online bill from getting overly large. So, you have two choices - either accept the ways of this list or leave the list and start your own with your own rules. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998

On Thursday, May 04, 2006 @ 6:24 PM, Orn Hansen wrote:

Föstudaginn, þann 5 maí 2006 01:03 skrifaði Ken Schneider:

...

These "rules" as they are called were in place long before you (or I, and I have been a member since around 1998-99) joined the list and have served to help cut down on some of the posts to the list. Since this list has thousands of people subscribed to it and can generate over 200 emails a day every little bit helps. And yes there are still people on this list that are -forced- to use metered dial-up so <snipping> out parts you are not answering and -not- using html does help their online bill from getting overly large. So, you have two choices - either accept the ways of this list or leave the list and start your own with your own rules.

-- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998

"As long as you're just hanging there, pay attention. Must, should, do, don't, shall, shall not -- those are just mere suggestions. There are only two absolute rules. What a man can do. And what a man can't do."

So you're saying the "rules", which you agreed to when you joined this group, are really just suggestions that one can take or leave, do I understand you correctly? Greg Wallace

On Friday 05 May 2006 00:23, Orn E. Hansen wrote:

Föstudaginn, þann 5 maí 2006 01:03 skrifaði Ken Schneider:

...

These "rules" as they are called were in place long before you (or I, and I have been a member since around 1998-99) joined the list and have served to help cut down on some of the posts to the list. Since this list has thousands of people subscribed to it and can generate over 200 emails a day every little bit helps. And yes there are still people on this list that are -forced- to use metered dial-up so <snipping> out parts you are not answering and -not- using html does help their online bill from getting overly large. So, you have two choices - either accept the ways of this list or leave the list and start your own with your own rules.

-- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998

"As long as you're just hanging there, pay attention. Must, should, do, don't, shall, shall not -- those are just mere suggestions. There are only two absolute rules. What a man can do. And what a man can't do."

I totally fail to see where the extreeme difficulties lies in 2 main little rules 1: Thou shalt NOT TOP POST 2: Thou shalt NOT HIJACK A THREAD .. what for cryin out loud is hard about that ... Pete -- The Labour party has changed their emblem from a rose to a condom as it more accurately reflects the government's political stance. A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks, and gives you a sense of security while you are actually being fucked. from GSM

On Friday 05 May 2006 22:35, Orn E. Hansen wrote:

Föstudaginn, þann 5 maí 2006 09:39 skrifaði Peter Nikolic:

...

1: Thou shalt NOT TOP POST 2: Thou shalt NOT HIJACK A THREAD ..

Hijack a thread? man, sounds serious.... should we shoot him, hang him, maybe nail him on the wall? Maybe we should just crucify him? I mean, these are rules handed out to us, by the great Jesmullah of the Internet ... All faithful followers of Jesmullah of the internet, join in one chorus and shout and drown the unbelievers in endless complaints.

Yep why the hell not .. :) -- The Labour party has changed their emblem from a rose to a condom as it more accurately reflects the government's political stance. A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks, and gives you a sense of security while you are actually being fucked. from GSM

On Saturday 06 May 2006 11:06, Kevanf1 wrote:

On 06/05/06, Peter Nikolic wrote:

...

On Friday 05 May 2006 22:35, Orn E. Hansen wrote:

...

Föstudaginn, þann 5 maí 2006 09:39 skrifaði Peter Nikolic:

...

1: Thou shalt NOT TOP POST 2: Thou shalt NOT HIJACK A THREAD ..

Hijack a thread? man, sounds serious.... should we shoot him, hang him, maybe nail him on the wall? Maybe we should just crucify him? I mean, these are rules handed out to us, by the great Jesmullah of the Internet ... All faithful followers of Jesmullah of the internet, join in one chorus and shout and drown the unbelievers in endless complaints.

Yep why the hell not .. :) --

I'm in favour of a gentle but firm reminder/pointer to the list rules for the first offence or even two. After that, I would accept stronger criticism.

However, we can all make the odd mistake. I know I do often. Possibly my worst is replying to the sender of the last post in a thread rather than to the list as a whole :-( I always realise I've done it straight away and send a hasty apology though.

By the way Peter, I do like your sig ;-) very true. -- ============================================== I am only human, please forgive me if I make a mistake it is not deliberate. ============================================== PLEASE DON'T drink and drive it's not clever, it's just stupid.

Kevan Farmer

Linux user #373362

Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire WS6 7HR

Hi Kevan Yes i have to admit to bieng more in favour of the gunboat flavour of diplomacy .. :-) ... No doubt you can guess where i would like to use one as well nuff said .. Pete . -- The Labour party has changed their emblem from a rose to a condom as it more accurately reflects the government's political stance. A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks, and gives you a sense of security while you are actually being fucked. from GSM

On Thursday, May 04, 2006 @ 8:38 PM, Paul W. Abrahams wrote:

On Thursday 04 May 2006 7:03 pm, Ken Schneider wrote:

...

These "rules" as they are called were in place long before you (or I, and I have been a member since around 1998-99) joined the list and have served to help cut down on some of the posts to the list. Since this list has thousands of people subscribed to it and can generate over 200 emails a day every little bit helps. And yes there are still people on this list that are -forced- to use metered dial-up so <snipping> out parts you are not answering and -not- using html does help their online bill from getting overly large. So, you have two choices - either accept the ways of this list or leave the list and start your own with your own rules.

The reality is that there's a core community of regular members and a far larger group of occasional and short-term members.

You can't really expect those in that larger group to do much beyond follow the rules of common sense.

Say what? When I joined, the message I got welcoming me to the group directed me to the list of rules for the group. Not sure how one gets from there to a rule of just following common sense.

And then there are those who get trapped in the group and can't figure out how to escape.

Trapped? Like one day they woke up and they were suddenly getting email from this user group and had no idea why?

Since almost all of them are very short-term or even one-time visitors, they certainly won't know the rules, let alone know what it takes

to unsubscribe. As they struggle to escape the web, they generate a flurry

of posts, many of the form "you should know that". And like a spider web, this trap usually has visitors.

Wow, I hadn't realized how insidious this list was before now.

Paul

Greg Wallace

On Wednesday 03 May 2006 12:34, Matthew Stringer wrote:

Erm, what's the difference, and why is it annoying?

Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com Please Google "what is hijacking a thread?" and "what are e-mail threads?" Meanwhile: Don't click 'reply' to start a new topic. Create a new message instead. Click 'reply' *only* when responding to the message you are reading. If you follow these simple instructions the complaints will stop.

I'd just re-installed my PC and thus didn't have the original email to reply to.

In that case, you start a new thread instead of inserting your comments into the middle of another discussion (threads are 'discussions'.)

It is getting increasingly complicated posting to this list, it seems that no matter what you do someone will find fault and complain.

When you know how things are done, it isn't complicated at all. Carl

On Wednesday 03 May 2006 10:43, Matthew Stringer wrote:

On Wednesday 03 May 2006 18:36, Carl Hartung wrote:

...

When you know how things are done, it isn't complicated at all.

Carl

Nothing as annoying as having some twerp being rude to you though!

Go Google that!

You should read and heed your own words!! Jim Cunning

What is the proper protocol for titling a post that's a logical follow-on from a previous post but not on the same topic as the original post? A new thread loses a valuable connection; retaining the old title causes the new post to be quite off-topic. I've always retitled my post, but perhaps there's a better way. Paul

On Wednesday 03 May 2006 19:36, Carl Hartung wrote:

On Wednesday 03 May 2006 12:34, Matthew Stringer wrote:

...

Erm, what's the difference, and why is it annoying?

Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@suse.com Please Google "what is hijacking a thread?" and "what are e-mail threads?"

Meanwhile:

Don't click 'reply' to start a new topic. Create a new message instead.

Clicking on the list's email address (right after 'To:') works also. Cheers, Leen

Gil Weber wrote:

Or is this an annomolly with my KMail set-up?

Is that anolmandolly in British spelling? -- Jos van Kan registered Linux user #152704

On Wednesday 03 May 2006 16:44, Gil Weber wrote:

Neither "r" nor "l" would go back to you in the same way that you replied directly to my original post.

No, but Shift+A would! I think that your Reply-To header will lead to people accidentally sending you private mails (as I almost did here, by pressing r, which usually replies to the list). And, given that you can reply to the author of a mail without a Reply-To set by pressing Shift-A in KMail, there's nothing gained by adding it. Normally, r -> list, l -> list, a -> list + author, shift+a -> author. With your headers, this is the same except that r -> author. I suppose inferior (to KMail) mail clients might do better with your settings. -- Bill Gallafent.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Wednesday 2006-05-03 at 23:26 -0500, James F. Pirtle wrote:

Any other suggestions?

Yes! I asked about your setup, you didn't answer. - -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFEWfSItTMYHG2NR9URAqeDAJ98Ht8F9jga5foquSuk4Fl2vwtRxgCgjFjD wOE1RNy+LLiqv49VljSkSII= =+0jW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----