As anyone who has examined the list of my threads (if there is any such person--I doubt it) may notice, I prefer starting a new thread for every new question, even related questions on the same subject. This is partly because I don't like long threads that bring up more than one question, but mostly because I figure that starting a new thread for every related question will attract more attention and get a reply sooner. Is that rude of me? I would like to follow our etiquette.

I think you've done a pretty good job of separating out. You just have to make a judgement call on how "related" they are. If they are really part of the same problem, I would probably refrain from starting a new thread, but maybe change the title of the old thread to be more detailed.

When you were working on your SATA controller, you started a new thread for "how to stop X". I think that was probably valid to start a new thread because it was more of a general question. But if you had wanted to know how to compile and install that particular SATA driver, I probably would have just left it together.

What pljvaldez said really. IMO, if a problem is separate you would be best to start a new thread. If one problem follows from another - say after recompiling your kernel you notice that hibernation stops working - then it's best to leave it as one thread so we can follow the progress.

My problem is that continuing threads--mine, anyway--tend to be forgotten. How do you call attention back to the subject except by starting another thread?