kindle

MaryL wrote:
"Christina Websell" wrote in message


And what point of changing the title to "kindle" helps me?
Tweed



But that should not have changed your
original thread unless some of the newsreaders had that effect.
Joyce started her message with these words: "Starting a new thread
here. I have some questions about the Kindle...."


Mary, this is not true, unfortunately. Replying to a message and
changing the title to "kindle" does not create a new thread. Maybe it
looks like that to you, if WLM uses only the titles for threading, but
those of us using other software see the messages as a continuation and
part of Christina's original thread.
In order to create a new thread, one must compose a new message, like
I have done. This here message is indeed the start of a new thread
called "kindle". I have no idea how WLM will see it; if it looks only at
the subject, maybe you will see this message as part of the other
thread. People using other readers, however, will see it as separate.

--
You'd be crazy to e-mail me with the crazy. But leave the div alone.
*
Whoever bans a book, shall be banished. Whoever burns a book, shall burn.

On 1/26/2012 5:31 PM, Patok wrote:
MaryL wrote:
"Christina Websell" wrote in message


And what point of changing the title to "kindle" helps me?
Tweed



But that should not have changed your
original thread unless some of the newsreaders had that effect.
Joyce started her message with these words: "Starting a new thread
here. I have some questions about the Kindle...."


Mary, this is not true, unfortunately. Replying to a message and
changing the title to "kindle" does not create a new thread. Maybe it
looks like that to you, if WLM uses only the titles for threading, but
those of us using other software see the messages as a continuation and
part of Christina's original thread.
In order to create a new thread, one must compose a new message, like I
have done. This here message is indeed the start of a new thread called
"kindle". I have no idea how WLM will see it; if it looks only at the
subject, maybe you will see this message as part of the other thread.
People using other readers, however, will see it as separate.


I see it as a new thread, but I see "" in the subject line - did you
leave that or maybe it put it in since there was another thread named
"Kindle"... [I've found that with Outlook Express, if you happened to
name a thread the same as some much older thread it would tuck it down
inside that thread even if the original thread is months old and nobody
had responded to it in months.]


--
Hugs,

CatNipped
See all our masters at: http://www.PossiblePlaces.com/CatNipped

See the RPCA FAQ site, created by "Yowie", maintained by Mark Edwards, at:
http://www.professional-geek.net/rpcablog/

Email: L(dot)T(dot)Crews(at)comcast(dot)net

CatNipped wrote:
On 1/26/2012 5:31 PM, Patok wrote:

In order to create a new thread, one must compose a new message, like I
have done. This here message is indeed the start of a new thread called
"kindle". I have no idea how WLM will see it; if it looks only at the
subject, maybe you will see this message as part of the other thread.
People using other readers, however, will see it as separate.

I see it as a new thread, but I see "" in the subject line - did you
leave that or maybe it put it in since there was another thread named
"Kindle"... [I've found that with Outlook Express, if you happened to
name a thread the same as some much older thread it would tuck it down
inside that thread even if the original thread is months old and nobody
had responded to it in months.]

Yes, I left the "" in. You're apparently right about OE (as I
mentioned in my other message) - it seems to look at just the subject
line of the messages, when deciding if they are part of a thread or not.