I'm glad to see you bring this up, athomason, as the same thought ocurred to me recently. FWIW, I'd like to see the layout be as you describe.

And I also agree with Turnstep's kvetch above about "anti-thread" reply names.   I respect that some of our fellow Monks have reasons for completely changing the node name of their replies, but it *does* make it tougher to follow context.   Kudra started a very logical reply naming scheme a couple months ago, that I think could be encouraged as "suggested standard" of sorts.   It goes something like this: RE(3)Original Node Name Here(Brief Reply Title Here).   A variation includes the replying Monk name with the RE (n), but I fail to see what value that adds, since the replying Monk's name is always associated somewhere close anyway.

My opinions, worth exactly what you paid for them.
    cheers,
    ybiC

Update: thanks to chromatic, who pointed me to The Threading Dilemma which already discusses in depth these points and much more.