And yep, I do instinctively open nearly everything in a new tab

Then what do you care what the default target is? In a reasonable browser, requesting that a link be opened into a tab should open it in a tab even if target="_new" is the suggested default behavior in the HTML of the link. This is how my copy of Mozilla behaves.

I hate it when a link is javascript or something and it doesn't want to act like normal HTML

I was not considering javascript nor indeed anything other than HTML.

So the suggested feature would only affect you when you forget to open the link in a new tab. In that case, would you rather have a new window pop up which you can just close if it bothers you, or have the in-process preview be replaced by a new page with the risk that going "Back" doesn't restore your text from the browser cache and the node contents that you were composing are simply lost?

I don't find that design decision at all difficult (and I particularly dislike target="_new" in most cases).

Further, for this particular use, I'd find jumping between two tabs (only one of which can be visible at once) to be the wrong way to consult a thread while I was composing a reply to it. So, even if I were in the habit of opening links into tabs, in this particular case I'd make an exception and open a new window so I could view the original node while I'm typing the reply.

Then what do you care what the default target is?

I care. I hate every website that fucks around with defaults. A link that opens in a new window is not the default. Whether something should open in the same window, a new window, a new tab, or even a new browser or a new computer, should be under the user's control. Button-1 for opening in the same window, Button-3 for opening in a new window, or whatever is one's preference (perhaps even with a style sheet). Web authors who think they know better than the user what the user wants should burn in hell.

Abigail

>   burn in hell.  ++
and for ever!

pelagic