Hi Peter,

>>Stefan:
>>In fact this silly behavior makes archive cleaning impossible, since
>>if you, Peter, are shortening parts of the cited message, you might
>>throw away parts, the replying person thought to be important to be
>>copied. Since he/she copied   a l l   one will never know.

>Peter:
>This is a definite possibility though I do in most cases make an effort
>to read the whole message - quotes and all - and probably not much is
>lost except for my time.

Good to hear that and thank you for your efforts and your spending of
time for this!

Peter:
>I used to do this myself but now I have stopped because
>"Re: Paleolithic studies in comparison (was: Finding out about..."
> and "Re: Paleolithic studies in comparison"
>would be grouped as two different threads in the archives.

But this is intended in this case. The issue with "(was: ...)" is
solely for the purpose of smoothly changing the threads and giving
people who follow the first thread the possibility to recognize, that
it is changing to a new one then. After the change it is useless to
carry with you the "was..." information any longer.

Instinctively guided regards,

Stefan
E-Mail: [log in to unmask]