Quoting W B Hacker:
>> look like: http://plonk.de/stuff/threading.png
> Thanks - but that is exactly the sort of artistic but useless eye-confusion I
> need to avoid, and the primary reason I use threading ONLY to check the point.
Well, tastes obviously differ. I usually don't even look into the
message list pane when reading a mailing list. With the keyboards
shortcuts (n, b, f, m in TB) it's quite easy and convenient to follow a
discussion. You might not need that if your memory is better than mine
(which is not the best).
> This is not source code.
Neither is a book's table of contents or other things which use
indention, but still they use (often long before somebody spoke about
source code). Because it's a fast way to conceive context, without
having to use brain processing time for parsing words.
Anyway, this is not the right place to discuss that, maybe if we push
the topic more into the "don't remove headers without good reason"
direction". :)
%20it's%20quite%20easy%20and%20convenient%20to%20follow%20a%20%0A>%20discussion.%20You%20might%20not%20need%20that%20if%20your%20memory%20is%20better%20than%20mine%20%0A>%20(which%20is%20not%20the%20best).%0A>%20%0A>%20>%20This%20is%20not%20source%20code.%0A>%20%0A>%20Neither%20is%20a%20book's%20table%20of%20contents%20or%20other%20things%20which%20use%20%0A>%20indention,%20but%20still%20they%20use%20(often%20long%20before%20somebody%20spoke%20about%20%0A>%20source%20code).%20Because%20it's%20a%20fast%20way%20to%20conceive%20context,%20without%20%0A>%20having%20to%20use%20brain%20processing%20time%20for%20parsing%20words.%0A>%20%0A>%20Anyway,%20this%20is%20not%20the%20right%20place%20to%20discuss%20that,%20maybe%20if%20we%20push%20%0A>%20the%20topic%20more%20into%20the%20%22don't%20remove%20headers%20without%20good%20reason%22%20%0A>%20direction%22.%20:)%0A>%20%0A>%20%0A>%20%0A>%20%0A>%20 "Reply to this message")
