Length of quoted material
Is there a way to keep TB from cutting off quoted material at the bottom of an email? I've found that after an email passes back and forth several times, the original messages are getting clipped. This is a problem b/c I like to save only the most recent email, and keep all the past correspondence quoted on it. I've searched the help files and option screens, and can't find a setting for this. -- linda http://www.secondsight-music.com Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: E-mail address in message body (was: Re: Countdown Clock forsignature???)
Hello Peter, On Tuesday, March 18, 2003 at 20:46 GMT +0100, an infinite number of monkeys posting as Peter Meyns [PM] typed: PM The archive properly hides e-mail addresses in headers, but PM displays everything in the body, thus making prey for spammers. While this used to be true, it seems the mail-archive.com people have changed their software. Take a look at Carsten's message in the archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg57120.html or yours: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg57122.html While I agree with your stance in principle, it seems the archive is more secure than previously thought. -- Thanks for writing, Januk Aggarwal Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Length of quoted material
Hello Linda, Historians believe that Wednesday, March 19, 2003 at 03:49 GMT -0500 was when, Linda Dunn [LD] typed the following: LD Is there a way to keep TB from cutting off quoted material at the LD bottom of an email? I've found that after an email passes back and LD forth several times, the original messages are getting clipped. You have (as do I) a cut mark[1] in your signature, so TB will ignore everything after it when quoting. You could avoid this by using a homespun quoting routine, or you could explore the thread-by-references option which makes following the flow of a discussion quite nice (View-View Threads By). [1] dashdashspacenewline -- Thanks for writing, Januk Aggarwal Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
error after migrating
Hi TBUDL members, I migrated to a new computer and installed The Bat!. I imported my accounts (backed up from within The Bat before migrating) and simply copied the Mail folder from my old machine to the new one. In my old installation of The Bat!, the root folder was `called thebat (not default), and in my new installation it's The Bat! (default). Now, every time I try to send a message, two error messages pop up saying Can't access c:\program files\thebat or Can't access directory c:\program files\thebat\files (my attachments folder). How can I correct this? -- Kind regards, Heijo (currently using The Bat! v1.60q on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1) Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: error after migrating
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Heijo, @19-Mar-2003, 11:42 +0100 (10:42 UK time) Heijo Alting [HA] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: HA I migrated to a new computer and installed The Bat!. I imported HA my accounts (backed up from within The Bat before migrating) and HA simply copied the Mail folder from my old machine to the new HA one. If you had a backup, you shouldn't have needed to do any copying. In fact doing both can cause harm, as you have discovered. ... snip HA Now, every time I try to send a message, two error messages pop HA up saying Can't access c:\program files\thebat or Can't HA access directory c:\program files\thebat\files (my attachments HA folder). HA How can I correct this? Exit TB and change the path settings in the Registry. Either that or start over, this time only restoring the data from the backup and not doing any copy operations at all. In fact, when you install TB from scratch, you are given an option to configure the installation from a TB backup instead of having to define accounts. - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v1.63 Beta/7 on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2 ' -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1rc1-nr1 (Windows 2000) iD8DBQE+eEm8OeQkq5KdzaARAutdAKD4EQW+zLQ1/BFGtEDd6puYpeo/LACeO36R 1/7ClJ8a360GmTXTvGfdWXs= =HE3x -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: error after migrating
I have to add that the messages are sent anyway after clicking OK in the error popups, and secondly, these errors only occur the first time I send a message in The Bat!. Heijo Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: error after migrating
Hi Marck, MDP Exit TB and change the path settings in the Registry. Either that or MDP start over, this time only restoring the data from the backup and This worked. The funny thing is that I did restore the data from the backup, but not all folders from my old machine were created. -- Kind regards, Heijo Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Word Wrap difficulty
Hi, I know I seem like a big newbie with my posts, but I'm suddenly having all sorts of problems with TB. I've gotten the problem with the cut-line in my sig sorted out, but now it appears I have another problem. Generally, I'm a pretty advanced user. I'm surprised TB is kicking my butt so soundly. When I compose a message, it wraps at 70 characters, as I have it set up. It looks fine on the screen, also. However, when I look at it in the sent mail folder, or when I see it come back to me (such as on this mailing list) it is going to the absolute edge of the screen (well over 200 characters). I've checked every possible setting, and auto-wrap is on everywhere. Yet I'm still having this problem, and it's driving me nuts. I was using 1.63 beta 7, and thought maybe this was the problem (I had rich text as the viewer, plain text windows as the editor). I just switched back to 1.62, and I'm still having the problem. Nothing in the help file about this. I'm really very happy to have bought TB; my only gripe is all these issues with the text editor. It's like going back to WordStar circa 1990. It's a fabulous program in all other respects; I just think that the text editor needs to catch up, in a big way. One last question: is there anyway to disable the clipping of quoted material after the double hash? A lot of times it is used within the text body as punctuation (this is what caused me to lose the email chunk that prompted me to ask about the text clipping). Any help with these problems is much appreciated. :( linda http://www.secondsight-music.com Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: LIKELY SPAM
Dear Jonathan, On 17:29 16.03.2003, you [Jonathan Angliss] wrote... On 15:59 15.03.2003, you [Jonathan Angliss ([..])] wrote... And what is that supposed to achieve? And where does the checking occur. Resolving the IP address from the host wanting to deliver the mail. In your case this would be 66.228.134.123, which resolves fine[1] I think doing that kind of filtering is a little silly when it comes to spam. I get so much spam daily that has faked host details for the first 2 You cannot fake your IP address. received lines that this kind of checking would be pointless. Also check It's not about checking headers at all. The rejection takes place even before the client send his EHLO greeting. Cheers, Johannesmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [1] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ host 66.228.134.123 Name: netdork.net Address: 66.228.134.123 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ -- The light at the end of the tunnel is the headlight of an approaching train. Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Word Wrap Problem (II)
Actually, it *does* appear to be in the beta only - I used 1.62 to write my last, long post about the word wrap problem, found that it seemed to have fixed itself, then put 1.63 b7 back on. Now my messages aren't wrapping again. linda http://www.secondsight-music.com Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: LIKELY SPAM
Dear Jonathan, On 17:24 16.03.2003, you [Jonathan Angliss] wrote... How the ISP sets the addresses up is up the them. Mine doesn't do it... but I have seen some that do. And you're wrong... the IP doesn't come from the dial-up pool... it's a different subnet... just some RBL systems block whole /24 class addresses, instead of investigating where the dial-up pools go from and to. Again, your provider should contact them to get this fixed. Please don't forget that Internet mail is a priviledge, not a right. There are many sites blocking based on domain endings (*.tw, *.cn), on so called rogue networks (all AOL IPs except their MXes), others block their customers port 25 (AOL, Earthlink) or redirect it to their own SMTP server, no matter which one you wanted to connect to and so on. It's about fair play. If I choose to operate a mail server that does not need to take direct delivered eMails from declared dialin ports, no matter if this is modem, ISDN, DSL, short wave, CB or anything, then that's up to me, and perhaps my customers. I've seen many site, including ISPs with millions of customers(!) implementing these blockings. If you have a static IP, which is IMHO the only one suited to provide real server services, then your provider should be able to adjust the PTR DNS record so you don't fall into the dial-up pools. Cheers, Johannesmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Nicht weil die Dinge schwierig sind wagen wir sie nicht, sondern weil wir sie nicht wagen sind sie schwierig Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Problem with large file attachments?
Dear TB Users I have a recent problem downloading mail with large file attachments. For instance this morning we have an email on our ISP's server with a 3Mb attachment. If I try to download this with TB at or around 400k the transfer 'stalls' and just sits there. All mails of a 'normal' size download no problem. Is this a TB problem? My ISP tells me there are no problems at their end, but they would wouldn't they. :) I successfully retrieved the file using their webmail service which they tell me uses IMAP. Their answer is that POP is not designed for handling large files. Look forward to seeing your thoughts. -- Best regards Barry Using TB version 1.62i Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Word Wrap difficulty
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Linda Dunn [LD] wrote: LD When I compose a message, it wraps at 70 characters, as I have it LD set up. It looks fine on the screen, also. However, when I look at LD it in the sent mail folder, or when I see it come back to me (such LD as on this mailing list) it is going to the absolute edge of the LD screen (well over 200 characters). I was wondering how could that be, and then you wrote: LD I was using 1.63 beta 7, and thought maybe this was the problem (I LD had rich text as the viewer, plain text windows as the editor). The plain text (Windows) editor in the beta will not wrap text on sending. The wrapping you see while composing is soft-wrapping and not hard-wrapping. What most e-mail editors will do is to wrap the text on sending. TB! never had need for this since it's original editor (MicroEd) doesn't support soft-wrapping. It hard wraps as you type. Hopefully, the alternative editor will have the wrap on send feature added to it. However, that's a beta issue and is really for TBBETA. This message you sent is wrapped just fine, and I assume that you composed it using v1.62, right? LD I just switched back to 1.62, and I'm still having the problem. With viewing messages you had previously sent with the beta version. You shouldn't be having the problem with new messages you send using v1.62 and the original editor. LD I'm really very happy to have bought TB; my only gripe is all these LD issues with the text editor. It's like going back to WordStar circa LD 1990. It's a fabulous program in all other respects; I just think LD that the text editor needs to catch up, in a big way. MicroEd has some really nice features that the alternative editor will not. LD One last question: is there anyway to disable the clipping of quoted LD material after the double hash? A lot of times it is used within the LD text body as punctuation (this is what caused me to lose the email LD chunk that prompted me to ask about the text clipping). There's no way to prevent that. This is why it needs to be properly placed by the sender. - -- -= allie_M =- | List Moderator | OS: XP Pro (SP1) _ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: My Public Keys - http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html iEYEARECAAYFAj54XjgACgkQV8nrYCsHF+IYEgCffwC+BcZJhdLkqTmjzDgq3pON tkMAoPXORofU1YGAgCSaSIxLRAoH1WxI =ju+5 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Length of quoted material
Hello Linda Dunn, On or about Wednesday, March 19, 2003 at 03:49:14GMT -0500 (which was 3:49 AM in the tropics where I live) Linda Dunn posted: LD Is there a way to keep TB from cutting off quoted material at the LD bottom of an email? I've found that after an email passes back and LD forth several times, the original messages are getting clipped. This may be a beta problem, 'IF' you are not referring to signature lines. If you are referring to signature lines, TB! does cut anything off after the 'cut mark' which is --space followed by a C/R. LD This is a problem b/c I like to save only the most recent email, LD and keep all the past correspondence quoted on it. Check the TBBETA list for further discussion of TB! Beta trimming (or LOSING) text from long messages. Please note tagline.. -- Warmest tropical wishes, Spike They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin /\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign - Against HTML Mail \ / If it aint a webpage it shouldn't be HTML. XSay NO! to bloatmail - ban HTML mail! / \ Ask Spikey, he hates everything (HTML). -- Using TheBat! v1.62i hamstrung by Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1' -- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: E-mail address in message body
* Peter Meyns writes: on Tue, 18 Mar 2003 18:27:30 +0100GMT (18.03.03, 18:27 +0100GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] : ^^^ Maybe you didn't know, but this is not only a Message-ID but also a valid E-Mail address. One that I do read. * Gerd Ewald with this e-mail address writes: you read it a couple of times before: there are _some_ people on this list, me included, who don't like having their addresses displayed in the message body. They can send me a mail and I will put them on the same list with you, Thomas, Januk and Miguel. The archive properly hides e-mail addresses in headers, but displays everything in the body, thus making prey for spammers. Januk wrote that this is not true. But look at the source code of Januk's first link: , [ http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg57120.html ] | [...] | | FORM METHOD=POST ACTION=/cgi-bin/Nomailto.pl ! INPUT TYPE=HIDDEN NAME=user VALUE=ct-lists ! INPUT TYPE=HIDDEN NAME=host VALUE=immer-international.de | INPUT TYPE=HIDDEN NAME=subject VALUE=Re: Countdown Clock for signature??? | INPUT TYPE=HIDDEN NAME=msgid VALUE=[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Reply via email tobr | INPUT TYPE=SUBMIT VALUE= Carsten Thönges | /FORM | | [...] ` This is for the secure reply button on every archive page. If I was an address harvester I would write a small script that extracted the mail addresses from there. Search patterns are much easier... Two regular expressions and *tratra*: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I needed 10 minutes to combine a wget, a grep and 3 seds to get a beautiful list of E-Mail addresses. And I am really no expert in shell scripting... It's ok if you think that this is irrelevant for yourself, but please respect the feelings of others too and change your template for TBUDL. Thank you. :-) I don't think that Gerd needed your help in this case. EOD, please. -- Gruß, Carsten Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Countdown Clock for signature???
Hello Carsten, THANKS! It works great! :) There are 177 days till our trip to Disney! Is there any way to change the order of the display of Quick Templates? Now I have all the date diff QTs at the top and the ones I use every day moved to the bottom. Anyone? Fred - [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, 12:27:30 PM, Carsten wrote: CT At least this first QT is a little different from the one you can CT find on http://www.immer-international.de/tb_en/index.html#date_diff CT IIRC the problem with the old version posted by Gerd was that The CT Bat! would crash on an empty %Comment string. -- Using The Bat! v1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows 98 4.10 Build 1998 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problem with large file attachments?
Hallo Barry, On Wed, 19 Mar 2003 11:48:31 +GMT (19-3-03, 12:48 +0100, where I live), you wrote: BH I have a recent problem downloading mail with large file BH attachments. BH Is this a TB problem? Just downloaded a message with with a 5.5 and a 5.7 MB attachment, went just fine. BH My ISP tells me there are no problems at their end, but they would BH wouldn't they. :) Not sure how honest your ISP is, but it might be the combination of their server and TB. It might be a firewall or virusscanner on your side (try to disable those). It might even be a bad luck spell some voodoo type guy cast on your connectivity. BH I successfully retrieved the file using their webmail service BH which they tell me uses IMAP. Their answer is that POP is not BH designed for handling large files. They're right about pop3 not being designed with large files in mind. But I'm not sure whether the designers of imap had those in mind either. The whole mail system was designed for text only. Just look at my two attachments, together they were 12.2 MB, but the message that had them encoded was 15.8 MB, that's 30% overhead. The most efficient way to transport files is to upload them to your homepage and send your contacts a link that points to the file. -- Groetjes, Roelof Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Countdown Clock for signature???
Hallo Newsacct, On Wed, 19 Mar 2003 08:50:26 -0500GMT (19-3-03, 14:50 +0100, where I live), you wrote: N Is there any way to change the order of the display of N Quick Templates? Now I have all the date diff QTs at the top and N the ones I use every day moved to the bottom. Anyone? As the quick templates are sorted alphabetically, the solution to your problem is easy. Rename them to sometjig that starts with a 'z'. (That means you've got to edit the templates that call them too.) -- Groetjes, Roelof Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: E-mail address in message body (was: Re: Countdown Clock forsignature???)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, March 19, 2003, Januk Aggarwal wrote... While this used to be true, it seems the mail-archive.com people have changed their software. Take a look at Carsten's message in the archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg57120.html Very nice... I guess this is a more recent adaptation as they used to put the email addresses in the body. Well done mail-archive staff :) - -- Jonathan Angliss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQA/AwUBPniK3yuD6BT4/R9zEQLdOACgo0zZI/u8Z1ajPp1Z7PXqcMFkn3oAn3eT J/N+MjwY4r4cCD1Pl6jC2Y8i =VFqo -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: LIKELY SPAM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, March 19, 2003, Johannes Posel wrote... And what is that supposed to achieve? And where does the checking occur. Resolving the IP address from the host wanting to deliver the mail. In your case this would be 66.228.134.123, which resolves fine[1] Right... but it's not DSL... and what happens with addresses that don't reverse? The spam filters would be useless. I think doing that kind of filtering is a little silly when it comes to spam. I get so much spam daily that has faked host details for the first 2 You cannot fake your IP address. No... but you can insert extra header lines... and that was what I was talking about... What part does the filter pick up on, the first line to report a receive, or the last one. received lines that this kind of checking would be pointless. Also check It's not about checking headers at all. The rejection takes place even before the client send his EHLO greeting. Ahh... I see... I thought you were talking about a client side filter. That is of course in-effective when the mail is being received from another mail server. Which is normally the case in most situations as spammers fire emails through open relays. Of course, if people knew how to set things up properly, and allow relaying from authenticated hosts, or trusted addresses only, things would be a lot easier. - -- Jonathan Angliss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQA/AwUBPnibYiuD6BT4/R9zEQLxZACgmdugiqjkgH23HeNjugldC/Z0e9cAoJxU XcRfxYMa8Av03QNlW5H9Skwn =e2fx -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: LIKELY SPAM
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, March 19, 2003, Johannes Posel wrote... How the ISP sets the addresses up is up the them. Mine doesn't do it... but I have seen some that do. And you're wrong... the IP doesn't come from the dial-up pool... it's a different subnet... just some RBL systems block whole /24 class addresses, instead of investigating where the dial-up pools go from and to. Again, your provider should contact them to get this fixed. Fix what? You really have me confused... there is nothing to fix when your ISP assigns one block to dial-up and another block to ISDN, but the RBL lists just block the whole range... for example: 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.62 for ISDN (subnet mask 255.255.255.192) 192.168.0.63 - 192.168.0.255 for dialup users The RBL lists would block 192.168.0.0/24 instead of just the later half of the range. Please don't forget that Internet mail is a priviledge, not a right. I don't ;) There are many sites blocking based on domain endings (*.tw, *.cn), Understandable really... I get plenty of spam originating from .cn/.tw addresses. on so called rogue networks (all AOL IPs except their MXes) That's an odd stance. Last time I checked (and as you stated), AOL bounce mail to their own SMTP servers. If you have a static IP, which is IMHO the only one suited to provide real server services, then your provider should be able to adjust the PTR DNS record so you don't fall into the dial-up pools. Adjusting the PTR DNS records doesn't stop you falling into the mentioned brackets above (yes I know I used private address ranges as an example) for example. It just changes your name when somebody does a lookup. If you're blocking by IP range (which is what RBLs do), names don't mean a thing. - -- Jonathan Angliss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQA/AwUBPnid/CuD6BT4/R9zEQIgPgCghAND01GSKan4ppPOQKhmD31d2M8AoOJo scZaRlPo1cA7+hMJfc5ZTd78 =3XTF -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Message view: To, from, subject font...
Hello, OK, I give up. Where do I go to change this? I set it once, so it _must_ be possible! -- Nick Using TheBat!: v1.62i on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Message view: To, from, subject font...
Hi tbudl at thebat.dutaint.com: In the past Nick was post: ND OK, I give up. Where do I go to change this? ND I set it once, so it _must_ be possible! easy, secondary button over the titles -- Best Regards, Task Control mail: TaskControl at SoftHome dot net Using: - Windows 98 4.10.1998 - AVG 6.0 Free Edition - The Bat! 1.63 Beta/7 - Trillian PRO 1.0 B Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Length of quoted material
Hello Linda, On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, at 03:49:14 GMT -0500 (3/19/2003, 2:49 AM -0500 GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Is there a way to keep TB from cutting off quoted material at the bottom of an email? I believe you have a signature line problem as mentioned by Spike Januk. I get around this by selecting the all the text, Ctl+A, in the original message, and doing a Alt+Ins at the end of the message after my signature. Works great for tech support issues where you have to maintain the history. HTH! -- Best regards, Greg Strong TB! v1.63 Beta/7 on Windows XP Service Pack 1 Is there a way to keep TB from cutting off quoted material at the bottom of an email? I've found that after an email passes back and forth several times, the original messages are getting clipped. This is a problem b/c I like to save only the most recent email, and keep all the past correspondence quoted on it. I've searched the help files and option screens, and can't find a setting for this. -- linda http://www.secondsight-music.com Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Message view: To, from, subject font...
Task(?), ND OK, I give up. Where do I go to change this? ND I set it once, so it _must_ be possible! TC easy, secondary button over the titles TC - The Bat! 1.63 Beta/7 Is this is beta thing? All that I get is Copy, Write, Reply and Add. -- Nick Using TheBat!: v1.62i on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[3]: Message view: To, from, subject font...
Hi tbudl at thebat.dutaint.com: In the past Nick was post: ND OK, I give up. Where do I go to change this? ND I set it once, so it _must_ be possible! TC easy, secondary button over the titles TC - The Bat! 1.63 Beta/7 ND Is this is beta thing? All that I get is Copy, Write, Reply and ND Add. it is not the place where i'm clicking with secondary button. try with View/Message List Columns try with view/Message Header can you explain your question better? -- Best Regards, Task Control mail: TaskControl at SoftHome dot net Using: - Windows 98 4.10.1998 - AVG 6.0 Free Edition - The Bat! 1.63 Beta/7 - Trillian PRO 1.0 B Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Message view: To, from, subject font...
Hi All, On 19 Mar 2003 16:56:05 (my local time 08:56:05), Nick Dutton wrote (in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) OK, I give up. Where do I go to change this? Go to Option / Preference / System; click on the message pane header Change button at the bottom. -- Regards, Anthony It's your privilege as an artist to inflict the pain of creativity on yourself. -- [Programming Perl] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: E-mail address in message body (was: Re: Countdown Clock forsignature???)
Hi Januk, on Wed, 19 Mar 2003 01:08:27 -0800GMT (19.03.03, 10:08 +0100GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] : PM The archive properly hides e-mail addresses in headers, but PM displays everything in the body, thus making prey for spammers. JA While this used to be true, it seems the mail-archive.com people have JA changed their software. Oh, I didn't know this was changed. And they even hide message IDs... Thank you for pointing this out. :-) -- Cheers Peter Excess on occasion is exhilarating. It prevents moderation from acquiring the deadening effect of a habit. W. Somerset Maugham Winamp currently playing: Á¾^¾W - ²Ó¸ô Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: E-mail address in message body
Hi Carsten, on Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:10:20 +0100GMT (19.03.03, 14:10 +0100GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] : CT * Peter Meyns writes: on Tue, 18 Mar 2003 18:27:30 +0100GMT (18.03.03, 18:27 +0100GMT here), you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] : CT^^^ CTMaybe you didn't know, but this is not only a CTMessage-ID but also a valid E-Mail address. One CTthat I do read. Is it really? I know I can open a new message with it, but where would it be sent? CT They can send me a mail and I will put them on the same list with CT you, Thomas, Januk and Miguel. So I apologize for doing you wrong here. To me it seemed as if you just didn't care about the complaints. Sorry. :-) The archive properly hides e-mail addresses in headers, but displays everything in the body, thus making prey for spammers. CT Januk wrote that this is not true. But look at the source code of CT Januk's first link: CT , [ CT | [...] CT ` CT I needed 10 minutes to combine a wget, a grep and 3 seds to get a CT beautiful list of E-Mail addresses. And I am really no expert in CT shell scripting... I hardly have any scripting knowledge, and I believe that would go for most spammers too. So, having the address in the body hidden by the archive is certainly a good thing. CT I don't think that Gerd needed your help in this case. As I said in my apology above, it wasn't meant on Gerd's behalf. CT EOD, please. ACK :-) -- Cheers Peter 'Yield to temptation. It may not come your way again.' Oscar Wilde Winamp currently playing: Tori Amos - Your Cloud Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: E-mail address in message body
On Wednesday, March 19, 2003, 14:10, Carsten Thönges wrote: They can send me a mail and I will put them on the same list with you, Thomas, Januk and Miguel. Yes please, add me to that list. Personally I think it's bad netiquette to put another persons email address available online (yes, I know that you don't do that - thanks to the archive being smart enough to hide it) without asking for permission in advance. But as long as the moderators don't say otherwise, I guess you are free to do it if you want to. But again, I would be glad to be added to the above mentioned list. Januk wrote that this is not true. But look at the source code of Januk's first link: , [ http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg57120.html ] | [...] | | FORM METHOD=POST ACTION=/cgi-bin/Nomailto.pl ! INPUT TYPE=HIDDEN NAME=user VALUE=ct-lists ! INPUT TYPE=HIDDEN NAME=host VALUE=immer-international.de | INPUT TYPE=HIDDEN NAME=subject VALUE=Re: Countdown Clock for signature??? | INPUT TYPE=HIDDEN NAME=msgid VALUE=[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Reply via email tobr | INPUT TYPE=SUBMIT VALUE= Carsten Thönges | /FORM | | [...] ` This is for the secure reply button on every archive page. Didn't know this. Of course this is not acceptable, please change this behaviour as soon as possible! (not directed to Carsten of course...) -- Regards, Marcus Ohlström Using The Bat! v1.62/Beta7 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 PGP Public Key at http://www.canit.se/~marcus/pgp.asc Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Nod32
David, On Tuesday, March 18, 2003, David Calvarese wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: DC Is the plugin for Nod32 in the DC ftp://ftp.ritlabs.com/pub/the_bat/bav/ DC directory the latest version? It seems to completely lock TB! up when I DC try to use it with the trial version of Nod. There are one or possible two places in the trial version where a dialog box comes up asking the user to confirm that it is only an evaluation copy, or notifying the user that it expires at some point. My guess is that the mailer plug-in is calling the on-demand scanner, which in turn is requiring that confirmation, which is not being provided. Just a guess. -- JN Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: E-mail address in message body
On Wednesday, March 19, 2003 at 20:54:18GMT +0100 (which was 2:54 PM where I live) Marcus Ohlström wrote and made these points on the subject of E-mail address in message body: MO On Wednesday, March 19, 2003, 14:10, Carsten Thönges wrote: They can send me a mail and I will put them on the same list with you, Thomas, Januk and Miguel. MO Yes please, add me to that list. Please add me too! -- Best regards, David Member of E-mailaholics International PGP Key at http://search.keyserver.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCC7E7664template=netenextract,netennomatch,netenerror An optimist is simply a pessimist with no job experience. Using The Bat! v1.62i on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Nod32
On Wednesday, March 19, 2003 at 14:17:56GMT -0600 (which was 3:17 PM where I live) Joseph N. wrote and made these points on the subject of Nod32: JN David, JNOn Tuesday, March 18, 2003, David Calvarese wrote in JN mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: DC Is the plugin for Nod32 in the DC ftp://ftp.ritlabs.com/pub/the_bat/bav/ DC directory the latest version? It seems to completely lock TB! up when I DC try to use it with the trial version of Nod. JN There are one or possible two places in the trial version where a JN dialog box comes up asking the user to confirm that it is only an JN evaluation copy, or notifying the user that it expires at some point. JN My guess is that the mailer plug-in is calling the on-demand scanner, JN which in turn is requiring that confirmation, which is not being JN provided. Just a guess. Well, I broke down and ended up buying Nod32 (Yay me!) and that did fix the problem. Here's some bad news though: Apparently the plugin won't work with the latest beta version or the next release... I've moved to using their imon (the new version of the pop3 scanner), however, it doesn't scan outgoing emails... -- Best regards, David Member of E-mailaholics International PGP Key at http://search.keyserver.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCC7E7664template=netenextract,netennomatch,netenerror Friends don't let friends drive naked. Using The Bat! v1.62i on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
problem using Create Message feature in Sorting Office actions
Hi, I used Leif's instructions on creating a mailing list, and I have everything working except that for some reason The Bat! won't create a message from incoming message! I've done the following steps under the actions tab in the Sorting Office: 1. Checked the Create a message for box 2. Provided a name (I started with the list addr, but even tried an existing alternate personal addr. 3. I added macro information in the template. I know that the filter is working because I specify the messages to be moved to another folder. Nothing I've tried works for creating the new message. I've tried: - Not moving the message to another folder - Simplifying the template text - various target addresses (both plain and angle-bracketed) - restarting The Bat! - cursing Is this feature broken or have I missed some fundamental switch to get this to work? Plenty of folks seem to be swimming along just fine with a working mailing list. Please help me before I go insane. Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Nod32
David, On Wednesday, March 19, 2003, David Calvarese wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: DC however, it doesn't scan outgoing emails... FWIW, I think that scanning outgoing e-mail is a complete waste of resources and time. If I take sufficient precautions, the chances are slim that I as a sender would be sending out malicious code inadvertently; when I am the recipient, someone else's statement that their e-mail has been scanned on its way to me is meaningless. How recent were the definition files that were used? How truthful is the statement? Through what intermediate servers did it pass? For what specific types of code did the sender scan? And, more to the point, what do you do differently when you get a supposedly pre-scanned message? It's not like you turn off your own scanner or exclude the message from future scans. For all those reasons and more, I think that outgoing code scanning is meaningful only, and only to a limited degree, if it is performed by a web mail service on a regular basis and, therefore, might justify an exception to an otherwise tight spam filter. I'd be interested in others' comments on this. -- JN Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Nod32
On Wednesday, March 19, 2003 at 20:46:29GMT -0600 (which was 9:46 PM where I live) Joseph N. wrote and made these points on the subject of Nod32: JN David, JNOn Wednesday, March 19, 2003, David Calvarese wrote in JN mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: DC however, it doesn't scan outgoing emails... JN FWIW, I think that scanning outgoing e-mail is a complete waste of JN resources and time. If I take sufficient precautions, the chances are JN slim that I as a sender would be sending out malicious code JN inadvertently; when I am the recipient, someone else's statement that JN their e-mail has been scanned on its way to me is meaningless. How JN recent were the definition files that were used? How truthful is the JN statement? Through what intermediate servers did it pass? For what JN specific types of code did the sender scan? And, more to the point, JN what do you do differently when you get a supposedly pre-scanned JN message? It's not like you turn off your own scanner or exclude the JN message from future scans. For all those reasons and more, I think JN that outgoing code scanning is meaningful only, and only to a limited JN degree, if it is performed by a web mail service on a regular basis JN and, therefore, might justify an exception to an otherwise tight spam JN filter. I'd be interested in others' comments on this. I prefer to have it scan, as I have TB! filtering infected mails into a folder, especially ones that can't be cleaned that I would then forward on to the AV company. I'd prefer to know before one was accidently sent out to someone for some reason, just for my peace of mind, whether anyone else knows that I'm scanning it before sending it or not. -- Best regards, David Member of E-mailaholics International PGP Key at http://search.keyserver.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xCC7E7664template=netenextract,netennomatch,netenerror Brought to you by the letters W,I,N,D,O,W and S, and the numbers 9 and 5. Using The Bat! v1.62i on Windows 98 4.10 Build A Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
