Reply node titles (aka note titles) are the sole property of the monk who writes them, and if he so chooses not to modify it in any way, then so be it (even if it is the case of sheer lazyness).

Why would you be want to keep track of which old titles are associated with new titles? (it obvious when you view the thread/node/post which spawned the replies/notes)

 

______crazyinsomniac_____________________________ Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most. perl -e "$q=$_;map({chr unpack qq;H*;,$_}split(q;;,q*H*));print;$q/$q;"

I don't have such a proprietary stance on reply note titles, and would be happy to defer to the editors in this case. If Editors feel right in changing the title of a root node, then changing titles of notes that use the default Re: mechanism should present no further moral hazard. I agree that deliberately altered titles, such as yours above, should be immune from tampering.

The confusion can arise in Newest Nodes, wherein it can be difficult to determine by inspection which notes are associated with which root nodes. Yes, one can click on notes to see what they bind to, but that grates against my sense of Laziness.

Thanks for your consideration,

-Mark

Yeah. This has been proposed before (some kind of automatic managing of the node titles, like collapsing the Re:'s automatically and such), but none have sold it to anyone yet (so sowwy).

 


______crazyinsomniac_____________________________ Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most. perl -e "$q=$_;map({chr unpack qq;H*;,$_}split(q;;,q*H*));print;$q/$q;"