From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: chris@chris-wilson.co.uk (Chris Wilson)
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 21:01:10 +0100
Subject: [sup-talk] On making kill-thread easier
In-Reply-To: <1250785604-sup-5488@yoom.home.cworth.org>
References: <1250785604-sup-5488@yoom.home.cworth.org>
Message-ID: <1250797598-sup-5105@tiger.alporthouse.com>

Hi everybody! I've just started using sup after Carl told me he'd found
a fantastic new mail client. And, as usual, he was right.

Excerpts from Carl Worth's message of Thu Aug 20 18:07:16 +0100 2009:
> But then thought occurs to me, "Shouldn't sup just see that I'm not
> ever reading this thread when it reappears?".

I have a very similar inbox pattern to Carl, a quick pass to remove
uninteresting material before acting upon the rest. To this end, I use
'&' far less frequently than I should, because it's an awkward key
combination to use in conjunction with scrolling + archiving, and so I
am irritated by repeatedly archiving a thread which I have never read.
The behaviour I would like here is exactly: "Shouldn't sup just see that
I'm not ever reading this thread when it reappears?".

I'd be happy to have sup automatically kill a thread that I have
archived twice without reading.
-ickle