TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: CHANGING MESSAGE THREADS From:JIMCHEVAL -at- AOL -dot- COM Date:Sun, 1 Nov 1998 00:23:49 EST
In a message dated 98-10-31 23:26:52 EST, rhetonic -at- GTE -dot- NET writes:
<< I
ask that If you are not actually going to change the subject, that you
leave the thread name alone. It makes message tracking and archiving so
much easier for those who are pressed for time in a listserve that has
seen huge daily posting on a regular basis.
>>
Hmmm... I'd like to get a consensus on this myself. I'll admit I'd never
considered the *disadavantages( of changing the name, but I'd always assumed
one advantage was that threads so quickly shift on to new territory that I've
opened far too many posts that in fact had nothing to do with the subject line
(anymore).
In my own case, too, I know I've tried to 'nudge' certain narrowly focussed
posts onto more general territory by giving them a more generic name.
So I can see advantages and inconveniences both ways. Opinions?
