Hmm, never dawned on me there was more than one way. I use Firefox, and
type in groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.outlook.contacts
(actually, I have that as a bookmark)
When I click on the link I mentioned, there is no "reply" link, though
here on this thread there is.
Diane, I never thought of this group as a "news server". I guess I
don't understand the difference. In any case, I can read the messages,
and I assume that when posting a new thread, that it's still ok to cite
an old thread like I did? Sometimes there is a lot of info in an old
thread that would be kinda dumb to repeat when I can just cite it. Do
you see any reason why that is NOT a good idea?
Brian Tillman - 28 Jan 2006 19:49 GMT
> I can read the messages,
> and I assume that when posting a new thread, that it's still ok to
> cite an old thread like I did?
Sure it's OK to cite a prior thread like that. However, you were asking why
you couldn't reply but you never stated what client you were using and how
you were accessing the group. The ability to reply or not depends on the
client and the method it uses to access the group, not on any of the threads
in the group.

Signature
Brian Tillman
KathrynBassett - 29 Jan 2006 23:51 GMT
Since citing an old thread is workable, I don't want to beat a dead
horse, but now you've got my curiosity aroused again. I'm using the
same "client" to access the old thread as I'm using for the new thread
- my browser (Firefox). So what is "the method" that makes a reply
possible on newer threads but not on old?