Yes, but if errors were automatically tagged at a second-level (what I have been calling "staring", with the option to move between them), and you get a summary error log at the end, then having a 0 timeout does make sense. You are just going to deal with errors after the operation is done...

Nobody says you have to enable it, but it would be a nice way to be able to operate for at least me, and my guess is a lot of other people. I remember when (I think it was me who initiated it) spell-search was first brought up, and the general reaction was, more or less, "why?" -- Guess that one worked out pretty well, didn't it? I think this one falls into the same category...

> > The auto-timeout should apply to ANY mass function, not just
> tagged and
> > Mirror.
>
> That's true. If it doesn't do it yet, it should be implemented.
>
> > And, as previously posted, I suggest that anything that gets
> > auto-timedout should be marked with a "second level tag", ie., a
> "star"
> > and that partial untag should turn tags to nada and stars to tags.
>
> You already can see that if you switch on Alt+KByte. There will be
> different characters for not fully logged branches which you can then
> navigate along.
>
> > To go
> > along with that, option 6-T needs to have an option to instantly
> timeout,
> > rather than having to wait at least a second...
>
> Well, you missunderstood the reason for this setting. It was designed
> to be *always* active. You don't know in advance whether a log takes long
> or whether you leave your desk and not attend the operation. So in case
> you are sitting in front of your computer you should have the chance to
> interact manually which is not the case if the time is set to zero. I
> have set it to 1 minute so there is always time to respond. And if the
> operation takes hours it doesn't matter that there were 1 or 2 delays of
> one minute.
>
>
> Jürgen.