I personally think it's a good idea ... but what does it really buy? Clarifying who said what in response to whatever makes more sense when you view the thread. If the node depth doesn't suite your taste then you can change that at your User Settings (look for "Note Configuration").

It ain't broke, so let's not "fix" it.

L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L--
-R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR
B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B--
H---H---H---H---H---H---
(the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)

I think an indicator of a node's depth in a thread would be a good thing, but I don't think I'd care for anything as complicated as your proposal. I don't think that "3.4.1.5.1.2.3.1.1.1.3.1.1.1.2" would contain much more useful information than "Re15:" would.

-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";

Paraphrased (in good fun):

I know that there are already a lot of nodes about this but I couldn't be bothered to look for any of them but that one recent one even though it contained a link to another which itself contained links to several more...

;) Including Re: Automatic Re-ing with numbers (searching). But seriously...

I mentioned this same idea in (tye)Re: Dingbats in node titles: What's your opinion. I particularly like unique titles but, having seen "Re^15:..." just today, I'm not sure even I support the idea.

Though I would like to support "Re^15: ..." as the new default if all the details can be worked out (so I wouldn't suggest one holds one's breath unless one is actually writing code to accomplish it -- for which you can find some of my initial stabs at it via a few choice clicks).

Perhaps "Re^$depth.$sequence: $title"...

1. It makes the structure of the replies absolutely obvious. The current system I find somewhat confusing and I often group things with a highlighter - OK, I am old enough that I still like paper!
2. Sometimes in a response I like to refer to multiple responses. Using the counter would make this very simple, particularly when one monk makes several responses in the one thread.

I could add another suggestion to this as well, but I think this would seriously overload the server. Wouldn't it be really neat if as a thread was being displayed it would note whether the particular message has been seen before! It would mean a huge amount of extra database munging and although it would be nice I think it may not be too practical.

jdtoronto

I would like to register my agreement with jdtoronto...

1. Highlighters are messy and yes, I use 'em also.
2. Occasionally I would like to refer to more than one response also and it (an outline mode) would make it much easier (best would be if PM ran ispell on anything I type).

As for "it would note whether the particular message has been seen before"...what exactly is meant? The title, the message itself (need my pocket AI for that one :))?

Just my $0.005 ...
Madams