Philosophically, how do you "organize" two monitors (only applicable to those of you with dual monitors)

Frank,

Yes, I know, but I also mentioned WM/WLM/TB and since I have
TB, I posted some information about it (TB).

Yes, and that's exactly the problem.

'Even' simple GUI newsreaders like OE/WM/WLM/TB, etc. can do that by just
'opening' the thread in the threads pane and see in which branch/subthread
the current post is and look 'up' the thread to see the parent.

You posted something about TB, *but made it look like it was also applicable
to other newsgroup readers*. Which, reading your current reply, you should
never have done. But I'm stil assuming it was a honest, though maybe a bit
wishfull, mistake.

Actually? Yes! :-) John posted *several* responses, one was directly
to 'Arlen'. Directly to his OP actually.

And that has to do with Johns post to Bob_S ... what exactly ?

Trust me! My newsreader *does* show threads and *does* show parents! :-)

Yes, you already said that in your previous post to me - where I replied
that I like your readers behaviour better (for multiple reasons).

FWI, if you block a sender in OE [snip]

Thanks for the info.

You're welcome.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

On 17 Nov 2018 19:32:52 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

FWIW, in my CUI newsreader 'tin',

tin on Cygwin on Windows - respect!

In message , R.Wieser
writes:
Frank,

Yes, I know, but I also mentioned WM/WLM/TB and since I have
TB, I posted some information about it (TB).

Yes, and that's exactly the problem.

'Even' simple GUI newsreaders like OE/WM/WLM/TB, etc. can do that by just
'opening' the thread in the threads pane and see in which branch/subthread
the current post is and look 'up' the thread to see the parent.

You posted something about TB, *but made it look like it was also applicable
to other newsgroup readers*.

It _is_ applicable to _some_ other newsgroup readers. (Turnpike,
certainly; I _think_ OE too.) It's certainly not _exclusive_ to TB.
(Which you maybe didn't intend to imply anyway, but what you put could
be interpreted that way.)
[rest snipped]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Veni, Vidi, Vomit (I came, I saw, I was ill) - , 1998

R.Wieser wrote:
Frank,

Yes, I know, but I also mentioned WM/WLM/TB and since I have
TB, I posted some information about it (TB).

Yes, and that's exactly the problem.

I disagree. Read on.

'Even' simple GUI newsreaders like OE/WM/WLM/TB, etc. can do that by just
'opening' the thread in the threads pane and see in which branch/subthread
the current post is and look 'up' the thread to see the parent.

You posted something about TB, *but made it look like it was also applicable
to other newsgroup readers*. Which, reading your current reply, you should
never have done. But I'm stil assuming it was a honest, though maybe a bit
wishfull, mistake.

Easy does it! No offense, but that you can't parse my "Just F[Y]I:"
comment, even not after I elaborated on it, is not my problem and I
don't appreciate your insinuations.

That part - the part you quoted - *is* correct and applicable to not
only TB, but to - as I said - applicable to all of OE/WM/WLM/TB. Over
time, I've used OE, WM, WLM and now TB and I know what they can and can
not do.

If you think some of that part is not applicable to OE (or WM/WLM/TB),
then say what you think is not appliable and why.

Actually? Yes! :-) John posted *several* responses, one was directly
to 'Arlen'. Directly to his OP actually.

And that has to do with Johns post to Bob_S ... what exactly ?

Forget it. You snipped part of the context, twice in a row and I can't
be bothered to reconstruct it after the fact to show that my response
does make sense.

If you want to review it: You implied that John might have Arlen
blocked, causing John not to see Arlen's post to which Bob_S responded
without quoting. But that's unlikely because - as I said - John posted
*another* response directly to 'Arlen', i.e. he apparently had *not*
blocked 'Arlen'.

[...]

AFAIC, these issues are closed. AFAICT, they are misunderstandings
which are the result of too much snipping and misreading context.
Better nluck next time.

John,

It _is_ applicable to _some_ other newsgroup readers.

Sigh .... I didn't even contradict that. What I *did* take offence to is
pauls naming of a specific set of readers (and indicating that there where
more alike), and try to make it sound as if switching to the thread-view
tree would be something easy and/or handy for *all* of them.

Yes, its possible using OE. No, you do *not* want to "just" do that to find
a parent post. Too cumbersome. And that I mentioned.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

mechanic wrote:
On 17 Nov 2018 19:32:52 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

FWIW, in my CUI newsreader 'tin',

tin on Cygwin on Windows - respect!

Thanks. I used tin - and before that Notes (no, not that one) - on
UNIX (HP-UX) for many years. After my retirement, I kept using it, now
on Windows. First 'building' (make-ing, compiling, linking,etc.) from
source and later using the Cygwin package. I never looked back! :-)

Frank,

Easy does it! No offense, but that you can't parse my "Just F[Y]I:"
comment, even not after I elaborated on it, is not my problem and I
don't appreciate your insinuations.

**** you.

Your FYI was all about Thunderbird, AGAIN ignoring that you named *by name*
several other readers, including OE. Which I responded about and you have
been forcefully ignoring that response for the last few messages now.

I do not use Thunderbird, and your FYI about it is therefore of absolutily
zero value to me. And yes, that means I didn't even bother to read it.

Furthermore, I did not challenge your knowledge about TB, and as such have
absolutily zero idea why you think you need to drag it in every time.
*Especially not* as a response to me responding to your OE reference. Your
insistance of doing so is nothing more than obnoxious.

You might have made a honest mistake, but as far as I can see it you're
trying your damn best to cover it up by rambling on about something,
anything else. Which is a rather childish behaviour.

Is that non-insinuating enough for you ?

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

R.Wieser wrote:
Frank,

Easy does it! No offense, but that you can't parse my "Just F[Y]I:"
comment, even not after I elaborated on it, is not my problem and I
don't appreciate your insinuations.

**** you.

Sigh! You STILL don't get it, do you!?

Your FYI was all about Thunderbird,

I wrote: "Just F[Y]I:" and later elaborated "And note the, perhaps
too subtle, 'F[Y]I'. I.e. it's not directed towards (only) you.".

Now READ that again and at least TRY to comprehend it. Pay special
attention to the brackets and those pesky words "not" and "only". When
you finally grasp what I *really* wrote, instead of what you *think* I
meant, apologize for your mistake and your uncalled for attacks and
insults.

[More of the same misinterpretations/misrepresentations deleted.]

R.Wieser wrote:
John,

It _is_ applicable to _some_ other newsgroup readers.

Sigh .... I didn't even contradict that. What I *did* take offence to is
pauls naming of a specific set of readers (and indicating that there where
more alike), and try to make it sound as if switching to the thread-view
tree would be something easy and/or handy for *all* of them.

I see! You mix up posters, 'read' what was never written, don't read
what was written, misinterpret and misrepresent what was written and
that magically makes all of that your correspondent's fault, instead of
yours!? Makes perfect sense, NOT!

FYI, and yes *this* time its for *your* information and *only* for
your information, switching to the thread-view *is* easy for all of them
- just easIER for TB - and equally handy - or not handy - for all of
them.

Yes, its possible using OE. No, you do *not* want to "just" do that to find
a parent post. Too cumbersome. And that I mentioned.

That you find it too cumbersome if fine, but that does in no way
justify your way over the top attacks.