maverick> Is it possible to automatically start a 'New Thread'...

I agree that we could do a lot better in this regard. I recall feeling a certain level of... disapproval when I answered one aside by starting a new thread -- folks seemed put off by the lack of contextual discontinuity. <grin>

Presumably, if a new thread started automatically, there would be links between them, so it wouldn't be too bad.

Personally, I enjoy the lengthy parentheses that seem to occur - even when they stop being parenthesis and become a totally different subject. It is so exactly like conversation - especially after a few glasses of Chilean Shiraz.
Does it really matter if we stray off topic? and rehash old topics? Rehashed topics don't always cover the same ground, and will quite often lead on to fresh fields, etc., etc.. ( Look at that!! five punctuation marks for six letters that aren't initials!)

>...and will quite often lead on to fresh fields, etc., etc.. ( Look at that!! five punctuation marks for six letters that aren't initials!)

had you chosen to end your sentence with an ellipsis, you could have had eight(8)!!

>..don't always cover the same ground, and will quite often lead on to fresh fields<
There we are, back to agriculture (See the thread To "Make Hay" of May 12th, 2000). The possibility of adding links between threads would be a good idea, I think.

(See the thread To "Make Hay" of May 12th, 2000
Hey! I remember that like it was yesterhay! Can't believe it was half a year ago.
Links between threads would be cool. Then we could all jump around like grasshoppers (in a field of hay).

jump around like grasshoppers

or groove like skiers between moghuls, fish between traffic islands...

or groove like skiers between moghuls, fish between traffic islands...

Arf!