HS>> Then its not a normal reply and you should not add a REPLY line if
HS>> there was a REPLY pointing the Originator - the "other guy".

ML> i think that you are confusing the fact that 'reply' as used in 
ML> FTS-0009 is used simply to mean 'a message that is "based"
on another 
ML> message'

I am not confusing nothing.  My interpretation on how to use a REPLY TO
OTHER GUY usage of FTS-9 does not break the addressing sequence, while the
others do.  Which is better?

Its easy Mark.  Just do normal replies to a Message. Have everyone do
a normal reply and have a long thread with NO one doing a FOLLOW UP. In
each and every message, no matter how deep in the Tree Level you go,
the addressing is always correct and the MSGID always points to the
messag author and the REPLY points to the other guy.

Now how come when you do a "REPLY TO OTHER GUY" should this logic and
perfect addressing logic break?  Whats the REASON?  For what PURPOSE?

Sorry, hey, SX was the first off-line reader to do FTS-9 in both
directions.  Addressing was very important so I was able to see this first.
Blue Wave, as I am finding out, does not support FTS-9 so it doesn't count.
Sysop editors have the nodelist in front of them so they can easily and
automatically check an address, but as I pointed out to Matt, that logic
breaks for Points.

ML> it seems that you have totally forgotten about JAM message bases and
ML> their threading... JAM relys on the MSGID/REPLY control lines to link
ML> replies of any type to the original... yes, when the original is purged
ML> from the base, then threading is 'off' a bit but only in that you can't
ML> get to the original... you can still go from one reply to another...

Its off a bit?  Its always off. Come on Mark, You know you can rely on
threading and it certainly doesn't work across the board in general, what
happens when JAM based is exported to a PCBOARD base or a HMS based or that
base, etc.  Its totally useless and if you use the BLUE WAVE reader to
reply, JAMS's reply system goes out door because the REPLY line is lost.
 
ML> RA, TimED, MKREADER, GOLDED, ALL the packages that use JAM and follow
ML> FTS-0009 do it the same way... even _old_ versions of the software that
ML> didn't worry about linking on them used them in the way described...

Well, I am confident if they were PRESENTED with a REPLY TO OTHER GUY
concept, and shown that their "Reply to OTHER guy" concept breaks
ADDRESSING, they might reconsider what they are doing.  I am sure they
simply didn't see it and I see now others here didn't either.   RA doesn't
have a REPLY to other guy concept anyway.  As I said about, ADDRESSING
stays in intact for normal replies.  Why break it when you do a "REPLY TO
OTHER GUY"?
--- Platinum Xpress/386/Wildcat! v1.2f