Re: Recipients' Addresses Suppression

2009-06-11 Thread Chew Yoke Lim
Hello Paul On Thursday, June 11, 2009, 1:51:00 PM, you wrote: Hello tb...@thebat., Thursday, June 11, 2009, 3:31:11 PM, you wrote: CYL Hello CYL Is there a method in The Bat! which allows one to send the same e-mail CYL to a group of people, but the e-mail addresses are suppressed in each

Re: TheBat 4.2

2009-06-11 Thread Roelof Otten
Hallo Leonard, On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:20:37 -0400GMT (11-6-2009, 5:20 +0200, where I live), you wrote: LB So, I guess that's about the size of it. I like TheBat very much, but LB I do not like paying for upgrades. You don't need to upgrade. The older versions keep on working just like before.

Mod: Untrimmed reply (was: TheBat 4.2)

2009-06-11 Thread Roelof Otten
Hallo Leonard, On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:20:37 -0400GMT (11-6-2009, 5:20, where I live), you wrote: Current version is 4.2.4 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html moderator Note: This moderator's

Re: Re: Recipients' Addresses Suppression

2009-06-11 Thread MONSELL
Hello Lim, Maybe I do not understand your problem clearly, but when I send to people without showing their email addresses, I just put them in BCC: blind copy instead of in To: If I have to send e-mail to the same group of people, such as members of a society of which I am a member, very

Re: Recipients' Addresses Suppression

2009-06-11 Thread Roelof Otten
Hallo Chew, On Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:31:11 +0800GMT (11-6-2009, 7:31 +0200, where I live), you wrote: CYL Is there a method in The Bat! which allows one to send the same e-mail CYL to a group of people, but the e-mail addresses are suppressed in each CYL of the e-mail received? Basically TB

Re: Recipients' Addresses Suppression

2009-06-11 Thread Roelof Otten
Hallo Chew, On Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:47:28 +0800GMT (11-6-2009, 8:47 +0200, where I live), you wrote: CYL I have not used BCCs in The Bat!, so I don't know if by doing so, CYL the recipients' addresses are suppressed. But some other e-mail CYL clients, the BCCs still show up in the

Re: How to kill a zombie identity in the from field

2009-06-11 Thread Tom
Thursday, June 11, 2009, 11:41:45 AM, you wrote: Hello Everyone, I disabled one of my accounts as it received too much spam. The account still exists for the history but will not be used anymore for sending or receiving emails. I cannot find a way to stop the auto-suggestion to come up

Re: Recipients' Addresses Suppression

2009-06-11 Thread Julian Beach (Lists)
On Thursday, June 11, 2009, 7:47:28 AM, Chew Yoke Lim wrote: If I have to send e-mail to the same group of people, such as members of a society of which I am a member, very often, is there a way of NOT having to insert their addresses each time I send them an e-mail, but pick up all the

Re[2]: Recipients' Addresses Suppression

2009-06-11 Thread Paul Berger
Hello tb...@thebat., Thursday, June 11, 2009, 4:47:28 PM, you wrote: ...snip Maybe I do not understand your problem clearly, but when I send to people without showing their email addresses, I just put them in BCC: blind copy instead of in To: CYL If I have to send e-mail to the same group

Re: Recipients' Addresses Suppression

2009-06-11 Thread MFPA
Hi On Thursday 11 June 2009 at 8:24:19 AM, in mid:1343150610.20090611092...@otten.tv, Roelof Otten wrote: It isn't necessary to place a recipient in the To field, though placing your own address there means that message is less prone to interception by spam filters. Here, TB! will not let

Re: TheBat 4.2

2009-06-11 Thread MFPA
Hi On Thursday 11 June 2009 at 8:15:30 AM, in mid:1306915618.20090611091...@otten.tv, Roelof Otten wrote: You don't need to upgrade. The older versions keep on working just like before. Same as you don't /need/ to upgrade from Windows XP to Vista; indeed, many people advocate not doing so -

Re: How to kill a zombie identity in the from field

2009-06-11 Thread MFPA
Hi On Thursday 11 June 2009 at 2:21:10 AM, in mid:784035865.2009062...@sunnysydney.com, Tom wrote: I cannot find a way to stop the auto-suggestion to come up with my now deleted address on top. I was going to suggest moving it to the bottom by putting a Z at the beginning of the account

Re: Recipients' Addresses Suppression

2009-06-11 Thread Roelof Otten
Hallo MFPA, On Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:17:57 +0100GMT (11-6-2009, 13:17 +0200, where I live), you wrote: M Here, TB! will not let me leave the TO field blank. A dialog box M appears when I hit send saying You cannot leave To: field blank M Maybe I have configured this in an option somewhere. (The

Re: Recipients' Addresses Suppression

2009-06-11 Thread MFPA
Hi On Thursday 11 June 2009 at 12:45:44 PM, in mid:1071914001.20090611134...@otten.tv, Roelof Otten wrote: I'm not aware of an option in TB that warns for an empty To header, but there are servers that don't accept those, is it TB passing through a server response? I made a

Re: Recipients' Addresses Suppression

2009-06-11 Thread Bill McQuillan
On Thu, 2009-06-11, MFPA wrote: On Thursday 11 June 2009 at 12:45:44 PM, in mid:1071914001.20090611134...@otten.tv, Roelof Otten wrote: I'm not aware of an option in TB that warns for an empty To header, but there are servers that don't accept those, is it TB passing through a

Problem with %HDR macro

2009-06-11 Thread Arjan de Groot
Hello fellow TBUDlers, TB! has the possibility to add user-defined headers to messages. First you have to define these headers (Options - Preferences - Viewer/Editor - Message Headers), then you can use these headers by inserting the associated macro into a template. The header definition

Re: Problem with %HDR macro

2009-06-11 Thread Marek Mikus
Hello all, Friday, June 12, 2009, Arjan de Groot wrote: When trying to use this macro there is however a problem. If there is a - in the header's RFC name (like in User-Agent) it doesn't work. For example, if I put %HDRUser-Agent='The Beta!' in a template, my message-body (literally) starts

Re: Recipients' Addresses Suppression

2009-06-11 Thread MFPA
Hi On Thursday 11 June 2009 at 7:30:25 PM, in mid:1679766999.2009063...@pobox.com, Bill McQuillan wrote: The recommended way to handle this case is to put all of the recipients in the BCC: header field, which will be removed when the message is actually sent, and to put undisclosed