This group, reply vs no reply
 

What determines whether you can reply to a thread? Is it a matter of
after a certain time the thread is considered dead and you can no
longer reply? For instance, I found this thread that pertains to a
question I have.
http://groups.google.com/group/micro...e0b553a8cee7b4
However, I can't reply to it. But I can reply to more recent threads.
(so it's not a matter of being logged in).
Seems odd that a thread can't be replied to just because it's old.

This group, reply vs no reply
 

Most news servers delete messages after 90 days or so - so replying to that
message would create a message with no prior context. Better is to post your
problem and what you've tried so far in a new thread.

--
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours
Coauthor, OneNote 2003 for Windows (Visual QuickStart Guide)
Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/

Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/
Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com
Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter:



"KathrynBassett" wrote in message
ups.com...
What determines whether you can reply to a thread? Is it a matter of
after a certain time the thread is considered dead and you can no
longer reply? For instance, I found this thread that pertains to a
question I have.
http://groups.google.com/group/micro...e0b553a8cee7b4
However, I can't reply to it. But I can reply to more recent threads.
(so it's not a matter of being logged in).
Seems odd that a thread can't be replied to just because it's old.

This group, reply vs no reply
 

KathrynBassett wrote:

What determines whether you can reply to a thread? Is it a matter of
after a certain time the thread is considered dead and you can no
longer reply? For instance, I found this thread that pertains to a
question I have.
http://groups.google.com/group/micro...e0b553a8cee7b4
However, I can't reply to it. But I can reply to more recent threads.
(so it's not a matter of being logged in).
Seems odd that a thread can't be replied to just because it's old.

Reply how? Via Google Groups? Via Microsoft's web interface? Via a
newsreader like Outlook Express?
--
Brian Tillman

This group, reply vs no reply
 

Hmm, never dawned on me there was more than one way. I use Firefox, and
type in groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.outlook.contacts
(actually, I have that as a bookmark)

When I click on the link I mentioned, there is no "reply" link, though
here on this thread there is.

Diane, I never thought of this group as a "news server". I guess I
don't understand the difference. In any case, I can read the messages,
and I assume that when posting a new thread, that it's still ok to cite
an old thread like I did? Sometimes there is a lot of info in an old
thread that would be kinda dumb to repeat when I can just cite it. Do
you see any reason why that is NOT a good idea?

This group, reply vs no reply
 

KathrynBassett wrote:

I can read the messages,
and I assume that when posting a new thread, that it's still ok to
cite an old thread like I did?

Sure it's OK to cite a prior thread like that. However, you were asking why
you couldn't reply but you never stated what client you were using and how
you were accessing the group. The ability to reply or not depends on the
client and the method it uses to access the group, not on any of the threads
in the group.
--
Brian Tillman

This group, reply vs no reply
 

Since citing an old thread is workable, I don't want to beat a dead
horse, but now you've got my curiosity aroused again. I'm using the
same "client" to access the old thread as I'm using for the new thread
- my browser (Firefox). So what is "the method" that makes a reply
possible on newer threads but not on old?