Re[2]: Filters are sooooo complicated

2002-10-12 Thread Richard Wakeford
Hello Thomas, On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 at 23:05:44[GMT +0700](which was 17:05 where I live) you wrote: TF If you are talking about addressbook groups, I suspect you may have TF your own address in that group too. So when you send a message to the TF whole group, you'll get it as an incoming mail, of

Re[2]: Filters are sooooo complicated

2002-10-09 Thread Richard Wakeford
Hello Thomas, On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 at11:31:35[GMT +0700](which was 05:31 where I live) you wrote: RW Even more baffled. So, if I send a mail to someone who is not in my RW address book or on a mailing list, I have to CC it to myself to get a RW copy? TF It has nothing to do with your

Re[2]: Filters are sooooo complicated

2002-10-09 Thread myob
Wednesday, October 9, 2002, 8:22:54 AM, you wrote: MO On Wednesday, October 9, 2002, 08:25, Richard Wakeford wrote: Until yesterday all my sent mail came back to the Inbox without a CC or rule. MO Could it be your ISP automatically adding a BCC to you on every mail you MO send? Ask them!

Re[2]: Filters are sooooo complicated

2002-10-09 Thread Richard Wakeford
Hello Gerard, On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 at09:42:44[GMT +0200](which was 08:42 where I live) you wrote: RW Then some messages started not showing up in the Inbox or the other RW reader and I'm now told, obviously correctly, that I have to put a RW rule in the Outbox redirecting my mail to the Inbox so

Re[2]: Filters are sooooo complicated

2002-10-08 Thread Richard Wakeford
Hello Thomas, On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 at11:43:36[GMT +0700](which was 05:43 where I live) you wrote: TF I filter mailing lists only at incoming time. Outgoing filters are TF important for normal mail, where your sent message doesn't come back TF to you. Oh, I thought *all* mail comes back to me, at

Re[2]: Filters are sooooo complicated

2002-10-08 Thread Richard Wakeford
Hello Thomas, On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 at22:40:47[GMT +0700](which was 16:40 where I live) you wrote: TF No, I mean a mail that I sent just to a recipient, not to a list. For TF example if I send a message directly to your address. It will not come TF back to me, unless I include my own address as

Re[2]: Filters are sooooo complicated

2002-10-08 Thread Richard Wakeford
Hello Marck, On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 at02:37:59[GMT +0100](which was 02:37 where I live) you wrote: MW Are you saying you want *another* copy sent to you? RW Well some of my mail (most if it actually) comes to the inbox RW anyway so why doesn't it all so that it can all automatically RW get

Re[2]: Filters are sooooo complicated

2002-10-07 Thread Richard Wakeford
Hello Mark, On Mon, 7 Oct 2002 at12:12:36[GMT -0700](which was 20:12 where I live) you wrote: MW I think one of the main things that people trip over is that the MW strings in the Filtering strings box are treated as AND clauses MW rather than OR clauses. In other words, if you have more than

Re[2]: Filters are sooooo complicated

2002-10-07 Thread Richard Wakeford
Hello Gerard, On Mon, 7 Oct 2002 at19:14:54[GMT +0200](which was 18:14 where I live) you wrote: G - You need to determine a UNIQUE filtering characteristic that does not G change over time. G The simplest being the email address a person. I thought I had but I've been told one answer, the

Re[2]: Filters are sooooo complicated

2002-10-07 Thread Richard Wakeford
Hello Thomas, On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 at01:35:27[GMT +0700](which was 19:35 where I live) you wrote: TF Check whether this is always true. Is sender the group? I believe in TF this group, it isn't. Now you've got me thinking. As my name is not in the group or the address book I assumed sender was

Re[2]: Filters are sooooo complicated

2002-10-07 Thread Richard Wakeford
Hello Leif, On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 at20:00:27[GMT -0600](which was 03:00 where I live) you wrote: LG Just wanted to check. Have you read: LG http://www.pcwize.com/thebat/filtering.shtml Yes I have but it's all far too complicated and for me and leaves me half way down page one! -- Best