anyone see this? ATF trying to say motorsa are not PADs

Where is the IZ when you need him?? Is the IZ mosaic complete?? (:-)
Fred

Yes.

He made a post here recently. IIRC he started this thread!
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

Huh ? Tater started this thread, is he building a Mosaic ?
If so, is it home fries or hash ?

Well, the first post on the subject "fixing Humpty Dumpty" came from Iz. Here's the snipped header:
X-NEWS: eisner.encompasserve.org rec.models.rockets: 555546 Path: news.binc.net!attcg1!attcg2!ip.att.net!news-out.visi.com!spool-3.news.visi.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!gnilink.net!cyclone.rdc-nyc.rr.com!news-out.nyc.rr.com!twister.nyc.rr.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Ismaeel Abdur-Rasheed [announce only]" Newsgroups: rec.models.rockets Subject: fixing Humpty Dumpty Message-ID: Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2005 19:24:47 GMT Xref: news.binc.net rec.models.rockets:555546
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

Maybe in your news reader.
But IZ hit reply to TATERS thread
he then cleared the subject line and put in
some news readers will say that's a new thread.
others retain that it was a reply to the original
;-)

And it always strikes me as amusing/exasperating when someone posts a message that makes it sound like they're under the impression that the way their particular newsreader or favorite archive site displays "Threads" is some absolute characteristic of the newsgroup.
Mine will go either way - it can either sort by "subject" or "reference".
In a long conversational exchange it's difficult to view the thread as being "anybody's" in particular: Tater posted the first "anyone see this" message, but Iz was responding to something Ken McG. posted several exchanges later, and decided a subject change was in order to reflect topic drift: I guess we can call that "new subject, same thread"... I don't generally worry too much about mechanically-generated "thread" display: it is useful for backtracing to reply to an earlier message in an exchange but news clients are sufficiently inconsistent about maintaining the "references" header trail that it's not worth worrying about "whose thread it is" in terms of the message at the head of the backtrace...
-dave w

Who, me worry ?
I still want to see tater's mosic ;-)

Hence new thread by any definition.

However there is one for each message title.
Jerry

Actually, not a new thread by the definition that matters: the one in RFC 850, which defines and specifies the format of Usenet messages. Section 2.2.6 of RFC 850 deals with the "References" header, and includes the following text:
--> The purpose of the References header is to allow articles --> to be grouped into conversations by the user interface --> program.
So, if the Subject header was changed, but the References header wasn't, it should still be considered the same conversation thread.
- Rick "The pedant's pedant" Dickinson

Thanks for the Cite, I knew those references were in there for something.
controlling."
This should tell us all something ;-)
P.S. I hit reply and just cleared the subject line.

null