Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: VanguardLH Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android Subject: Re: Is my phone on or off Date: Sat, 4 May 2024 21:37:38 -0500 Organization: Usenet Elder Lines: 67 Sender: V@nguard.LH Message-ID: References: <1tmn3zpqy8j1t$.dlg@v.nguard.lh> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net lltZO/ps+L7CkbZJz24BdQIIT0Q1s+4ZegZdD9PqrJxLYNd54C Keywords: VanguardLH,VLH Cancel-Lock: sha1:euGrWDnxwIzuQuB0LvPO9gEN3Ac= sha256:yt22WIj8ZbIQFh267sJwm0XsqTBZsLi2Ip4lzoi2J4g= User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.41 Bytes: 4406 MajorLanGod wrote: > VanguardLH wrote: > >> MajorLanGod wrote: >> >>> If you have to start/boot your phon to use it, it is off. Otherwise >>> it is on. Listening or not when idle shoud be configurabe. >> >> To whom were you supposedly responding? >> - There is no References header in your article which would show the >> parent article for a reply. >> - You did not add an attribution line citing the author of the parent >> article. > > I'm sorry. Since my response wss under 'Is my phone on or off' it > would be obvious I was just jumping into the conversation. I also > didn't want to be tagginh onto the end of one of the long chains of > previous respones I just hung it under the original query. It wasn't a reply despite looking like one. You started a new thread, and didn't even quote [part of] the parent article while attributing the author of the parent article. Just a new post out of the blue. Without the References header to link to the parent article, you didn't "tag onto the end" of anything. Your article was not "hung under the original query". Assuming (very ancient) NNTP clients will fallback to threading using the Subject header is iffy. That threading method often links together unrelated threads, and many clients won't do it because it is unreliable. That was the whole point of introducing the References header over 46 years ago (RFC 733), because threading by Subject sucked! That would have every article with the same Subject linked together, and does not ensure proper hierarchy (who said what to whom). Hierarchical threading is by the chain of MIDs in the References header, not by some common string in the Subject header that is often not unique. Perhaps it was a very old thread. It's not in my client (which purges messages older than 180 days) when I search on "is my phone on or off" in Subject. Tried to reconstruct the thread, but then you didn't link to the parent article, so nothing to go after. Google Groups is dead unless the thread is old, and searching on Subject gets a lot of unrelated hits there (2352 hits in comp.mobile.android). If I enclose the Subject string in double-quotes trying to search on that exact string, and add comp.mobile.android, I get zero hits. Google's search on Usenet has been extremely poor for many years as they degenerated the Usenet groups they carry. Search on Subject is not available at the Howard Knight archive site, just MID search is supported, but then there is no MID for parent article since there was no References header, or the parent's MID cited in the pseudo-reply. I understood your first sentence. It was the second that was confusing. Listening for what? The phone's microphone? For Bluetooth connect requests? For commands via USB using ADB? For remote access connects? That statement without context is what intrigued me. Got the MID for the parent article for your pseudo-reply? In the future, when you decide to reply but aren't really replying and instead starting a new thread, you might want to cite the parent article's MID header along with quoting some of the parent article's body along with an attibution line for its author. Then others can see the context for what thread you meant to continue but instead started in a new thread. You piqued my curiousity, but I could not find the parent article or its thread to which it belonged.