Does "Mark - Thread as Read" really work??

Does anyone, here, ever "Mark Thread as Read" in their newsgroups??

Late last year, I mucked up badly by deleting my main SeaMonkey profile 
(Yes, what I goose I am!!), so then I had to re-create my profile, 
including my account for this server, and four groups on 
news.mozilla.org, and my UseNet server account, with about twenty groups 
on news.eternal-september.org.

Then I went through and downloaded all the headers for those groups. On 
this server, I was up-to-date with my reading, so just marked the groups 
as read ... job done!

Different story for UseNet! What I had usually been doing was read all 
the "new" threads and threads with some unread messages in them and then 
read some of the "old" threads so, after downloading all the threads, 
then, for any thread I had posted to, I marked the entire thread as read.

And then I kept reading .....

Then, in one of the UseNet groups, I wasn't interested in one of the 
newer threads, so I killed that thread when there were about 25 posts. 
To be honest, I'm not sure, now, if I "Mark Thread as Read" or if I 
"Message - Ignore Thread (K)", but, now, when I look through that 
newsgroup, that thread shows as 12 Unread out of 42, or some such, and, 
in the Threads pane, if I expand that thread, I see about 30 "Read" 
messages and ZERO unread messages.

And, no matter how many times I click on "Mark Thread as Read", the 
figures still stand ... I'm told I still have 12 Unread out of 42.

It didn't worry me much .... until tonight, when I was reading (I think, 
another) group, one of the threads that I had "Mark Tread as 
Read"/"Message Ignore Thread" was showing as 16 unread out of 48, or 
some such, and all these unread messages were in "twigs" that I hadn't 
contributed to but the "twig" that I had contributed to *WAS* marked as 
read.

This leads me to ask .... When I click on "Mark Thread as Read" does 
SeaMonkey really mark the entire thread as read (as it should) or does 
it just mark the TWIG as read ... which in many threads would be enough??

Or has "Mark Thread as Read" gotten mixed up with "Message   Ignore 
Sub-thread (Shift K)" or something??

P.S. In the second case, I'm down to less than 40,000 unread messages 
out of a total on about 220,000 messages so I sure hope no-one suggests 
I delete the index file entry and start from scratch again!! ;-(

TIA
-- 
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.49.1 Build identifier: 20171016030418

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.49.1 Build identifier: 20171015235623
0
Daniel
6/7/2018 2:38:42 PM
mozilla.support.seamonkey 13128 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

7 Replies
132 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 49

Daniel wrote:
> Does anyone, here, ever "Mark Thread as Read" in their newsgroups??
> 
> Late last year, I mucked up badly by deleting my main SeaMonkey profile 
> (Yes, what I goose I am!!), so then I had to re-create my profile, 
> including my account for this server, and four groups on 
> news.mozilla.org, and my UseNet server account, with about twenty groups 
> on news.eternal-september.org.
> 
> Then I went through and downloaded all the headers for those groups. On 
> this server, I was up-to-date with my reading, so just marked the groups 
> as read ... job done!
> 
> Different story for UseNet! What I had usually been doing was read all 
> the "new" threads and threads with some unread messages in them and then 
> read some of the "old" threads so, after downloading all the threads, 
> then, for any thread I had posted to, I marked the entire thread as read.
> 
> And then I kept reading .....
> 
> Then, in one of the UseNet groups, I wasn't interested in one of the 
> newer threads, so I killed that thread when there were about 25 posts. 
> To be honest, I'm not sure, now, if I "Mark Thread as Read" or if I 
> "Message - Ignore Thread (K)", but, now, when I look through that 
> newsgroup, that thread shows as 12 Unread out of 42, or some such, and, 
> in the Threads pane, if I expand that thread, I see about 30 "Read" 
> messages and ZERO unread messages.
> 
> And, no matter how many times I click on "Mark Thread as Read", the 
> figures still stand ... I'm told I still have 12 Unread out of 42.
> 
> It didn't worry me much .... until tonight, when I was reading (I think, 
> another) group, one of the threads that I had "Mark Tread as 
> Read"/"Message Ignore Thread" was showing as 16 unread out of 48, or 
> some such, and all these unread messages were in "twigs" that I hadn't 
> contributed to but the "twig" that I had contributed to *WAS* marked as 
> read.
> 
> This leads me to ask .... When I click on "Mark Thread as Read" does 
> SeaMonkey really mark the entire thread as read (as it should) or does 
> it just mark the TWIG as read ... which in many threads would be enough??
> 
> Or has "Mark Thread as Read" gotten mixed up with "Message�� Ignore 
> Sub-thread (Shift K)" or something??
> 
> P.S. In the second case, I'm down to less than 40,000 unread messages 
> out of a total on about 220,000 messages so I sure hope no-one suggests 
> I delete the index file entry and start from scratch again!! ;-(
> 
> TIA

Mark as Read works for me, but I found that I had to shut down & start 
up or restart the application to see the effects.

0
EE
6/7/2018 5:11:59 PM
EE wrote:
> Daniel wrote:
>> Does anyone, here, ever "Mark Thread as Read" in their newsgroups??
>>
>> Late last year, I mucked up badly by deleting my main SeaMonkey profile (Yes, 
>> what I goose I am!!), so then I had to re-create my profile, including my 
>> account for this server, and four groups on news.mozilla.org, and my UseNet 
>> server account, with about twenty groups on news.eternal-september.org.
>>
>> Then I went through and downloaded all the headers for those groups. On this 
>> server, I was up-to-date with my reading, so just marked the groups as read 
>> ... job done!
>>
>> Different story for UseNet! What I had usually been doing was read all the 
>> "new" threads and threads with some unread messages in them and then read some 
>> of the "old" threads so, after downloading all the threads, then, for any 
>> thread I had posted to, I marked the entire thread as read.
>>
>> And then I kept reading .....
>>
>> Then, in one of the UseNet groups, I wasn't interested in one of the newer 
>> threads, so I killed that thread when there were about 25 posts. To be honest, 
>> I'm not sure, now, if I "Mark Thread as Read" or if I "Message - Ignore Thread 
>> (K)", but, now, when I look through that newsgroup, that thread shows as 12 
>> Unread out of 42, or some such, and, in the Threads pane, if I expand that 
>> thread, I see about 30 "Read" messages and ZERO unread messages.
>>
>> And, no matter how many times I click on "Mark Thread as Read", the figures 
>> still stand ... I'm told I still have 12 Unread out of 42.
>>
>> It didn't worry me much .... until tonight, when I was reading (I think, 
>> another) group, one of the threads that I had "Mark Tread as Read"/"Message 
>> Ignore Thread" was showing as 16 unread out of 48, or some such, and all these 
>> unread messages were in "twigs" that I hadn't contributed to but the "twig" 
>> that I had contributed to *WAS* marked as read.
>>
>> This leads me to ask .... When I click on "Mark Thread as Read" does SeaMonkey 
>> really mark the entire thread as read (as it should) or does it just mark the 
>> TWIG as read ... which in many threads would be enough??
it marks the *twig* as read, as far as I know
>>
>> Or has "Mark Thread as Read" gotten mixed up with "Message   Ignore Sub-thread 
>> (Shift K)" or something??
>>
>> P.S. In the second case, I'm down to less than 40,000 unread messages out of a 
>> total on about 220,000 messages so I sure hope no-one suggests I delete the 
>> index file entry and start from scratch again!! ;-(
;-)
>>
>> TIA
> 
> Mark as Read works for me, but I found that I had to shut down & start up or 
> restart the application to see the effects.
> 


-- 
https://facebook.com/gerardjan.vinkesteijn
"Just Say No."   - Nancy Reagan
"No."            - Ronald Reagan
0
GerardJan
6/7/2018 6:29:59 PM
Daniel wrote:
> Does anyone, here, ever "Mark Thread as Read" in their newsgroups??

I use it often.  It works for me without any problems.

0
Paul
6/7/2018 10:18:42 PM
<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 06/07/18 6:18 PM, Paul in Houston,
      TX wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:DOCdnW86ZJ3SMoTGnZ2dnUU7-YWdnZ2d@mozilla.org">Daniel
      wrote:
      <br>
      <blockquote type="cite">Does anyone, here, ever "Mark Thread as
        Read" in their newsgroups??
        <br>
      </blockquote>
      <br>
      I use it often.  It works for me without any problems.
      <br>
      <br>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    <font size="+1"><font face="Times New Roman">All the time - mostly
        in mozilla.general <span class="emojione e1-1F609"><span>😉</span></span></font></font><br>
    <br>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="166">-- 
"This is America!  You can't make a horse
 testify against himself!"      Mister Ed    </pre>
  </body>
</html>
0
UTF
6/7/2018 11:24:01 PM
EE wrote on 08/06/18 03:11:
> Daniel wrote:
>> Does anyone, here, ever "Mark Thread as Read" in their newsgroups??
>>
>> Late last year, I mucked up badly by deleting my main SeaMonkey 
>> profile (Yes, what I goose I am!!), so then I had to re-create my 
>> profile, including my account for this server, and four groups on 
>> news.mozilla.org, and my UseNet server account, with about twenty 
>> groups on news.eternal-september.org.
>>
>> Then I went through and downloaded all the headers for those groups. 
>> On this server, I was up-to-date with my reading, so just marked the 
>> groups as read ... job done!
>>
>> Different story for UseNet! What I had usually been doing was read all 
>> the "new" threads and threads with some unread messages in them and 
>> then read some of the "old" threads so, after downloading all the 
>> threads, then, for any thread I had posted to, I marked the entire 
>> thread as read.
>>
>> And then I kept reading .....
>>
>> Then, in one of the UseNet groups, I wasn't interested in one of the 
>> newer threads, so I killed that thread when there were about 25 posts. 
>> To be honest, I'm not sure, now, if I "Mark Thread as Read" or if I 
>> "Message - Ignore Thread (K)", but, now, when I look through that 
>> newsgroup, that thread shows as 12 Unread out of 42, or some such, 
>> and, in the Threads pane, if I expand that thread, I see about 30 
>> "Read" messages and ZERO unread messages.
>>
>> And, no matter how many times I click on "Mark Thread as Read", the 
>> figures still stand ... I'm told I still have 12 Unread out of 42.
>>
>> It didn't worry me much .... until tonight, when I was reading (I 
>> think, another) group, one of the threads that I had "Mark Tread as 
>> Read"/"Message Ignore Thread" was showing as 16 unread out of 48, or 
>> some such, and all these unread messages were in "twigs" that I hadn't 
>> contributed to but the "twig" that I had contributed to *WAS* marked 
>> as read.
>>
>> This leads me to ask .... When I click on "Mark Thread as Read" does 
>> SeaMonkey really mark the entire thread as read (as it should) or does 
>> it just mark the TWIG as read ... which in many threads would be enough??
>>
>> Or has "Mark Thread as Read" gotten mixed up with "Message   Ignore 
>> Sub-thread (Shift K)" or something??
>>
>> P.S. In the second case, I'm down to less than 40,000 unread messages 
>> out of a total on about 220,000 messages so I sure hope no-one 
>> suggests I delete the index file entry and start from scratch again!! ;-(
>>
>> TIA
> 
> Mark as Read works for me, but I found that I had to shut down & start 
> up or restart the application to see the effects.
> 
Stopped and Started many times to no effect ... for me!! ;-(

-- 
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.49.1 Build identifier: 20171016030418

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.49.1 Build identifier: 20171015235623
0
Daniel
6/8/2018 4:27:45 AM
🐴 Mr. Ed 🐴 wrote on 08/06/18 09:24:
> On 06/07/18 6:18 PM, Paul in Houston, TX wrote:
>> Daniel wrote:
>>> Does anyone, here, ever "Mark Thread as Read" in their newsgroups??
>>
>> I use it often.  It works for me without any problems.
>>
> 
> All the time - mostly in mozilla.general 😉
> 
> -- 
> "This is America!  You can't make a horse
>    testify against himself!"      Mister Ed
> 
Hmm! Three out of three where it works!! SM must be picking on me!! ;-(

-- 
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.49.1 Build identifier: 20171016030418

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.49.1 Build identifier: 20171015235623
0
Daniel
6/8/2018 4:29:27 AM
Daniel wrote:
> Does anyone, here, ever "Mark Thread as Read" in their newsgroups??
> 

[ ... ]
> 
> And, no matter how many times I click on "Mark Thread as Read", the 
> figures still stand ... I'm told I still have 12 Unread out of 42.
> 
> It didn't worry me much .... until tonight, when I was reading (I think, 
> another) group, one of the threads that I had "Mark Tread as 
> Read"/"Message Ignore Thread" was showing as 16 unread out of 48, or 
> some such, and all these unread messages were in "twigs" that I hadn't 
> contributed to but the "twig" that I had contributed to *WAS* marked as 
> read.
> 
> This leads me to ask .... When I click on "Mark Thread as Read" does 
> SeaMonkey really mark the entire thread as read (as it should) or does 
> it just mark the TWIG as read ... which in many threads would be enough??

I make a lot of use of that, and it works *most* of the time. 
Occasionally, I will find threads where all the messages have been 
marked read, but individual threads still show an unread count that's 
higher than zero.  I'm most often aware of this in cases where all the 
messages in a newsgroup have been marked read, but there's still a few 
threads that indicate that they have unread messages.

For that, I've found that the only work-around is to kill the thread 
entirely, to keep the messages from continuing to be displayed.

I'm guessing that there's a bug somewhere (and probably in code taken 
from Thunderbird) that it's one of those things that's low enough 
priority, that even if a BugZilla report gets filed (assuming that there 
isn't a case already), it will probably never get addressed. For the 
most part, this is an issue that more annoyance than true problem.

Smith

0
NFN
6/8/2018 5:06:50 PM
Reply: