Lan Barnes wrote: > On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 06:11:36PM -0700, Stewart Stremler wrote: > >> He'd also want a quick and easy way to abort the sending. How would >> he do that from Thunderbird? >> >> > > As I read this thread, I'm left with the unixer's question about > deletion confirms ... how many do you need? > > I've been stung by immediacy like everyone else, mostly in deletes. But > is there an alternative that isn't embarrassing? God, I hate saying > "yes, yes, yes" to windoze ... and it doesn't make me any more careful, > alas. > > I'm not saying it isn't an occasional bump. I just can't figure out an > algorithm that can tell my MUA which mail to hold back. > Actually, you could train a statistical model using naive-bayes (or linear SVM) by identifying e-mails that you wish had been held back. Without something like that, you pretty much just have to hold everything back.
I like DJ Bernstein's idea: have the sender store the message. That way you can do a delete even after the message is delivered. --Chris -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
