Re: More problems - and serious!
On Tuesday, January 27, 2004, 9:34:45 PM, MAU wrote: I must admit if I weren't already committed to TB this would be enough to send me running towards...oh, Pegasus or something. I nearly put Incredimail there, but then I thought, nah, never LOL M Incredimail ?!?! Why would a beautiful young lady like you want to M commit suicide? LOL - well no, I wouldn't. I did say I only *nearly* wrote Incredimail G. I wouldn't even go so far as OE G Yes, but clearly not often enough, since my current backup is, iirc, about a month old. M What about doing it daily? :) What about telling me to do that a week *before* TB has a nervous breakdown? ;-) M - What version of TB are you using? Ummm...2.02.3 CE. Why? M Just curious. I though you perhaps were using a beta. No, I haven't been brave enough for that (yet?) - besides, if I had been, I'd a) have posted on the beta list b) have had a more recent back-up LOL -- Deborah who spent hours sorting it all out yesterday, then *backed everything up* :-D Most people would like to be delivered from temptation but would like it to keep in touch. - Robert Orben Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: upgrade: WARNING!
Hello Marck, is may indeed work, but make sure you switch the accounts to POP3 first and backup the messages you want to keep safe from any IMAP accounts. you switch the accounts to POP3 first! How can I do that? Thanks for help. -- Best regards, Jeanmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Test for Allie - Please Ignore
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 A quick test of Allie's new filters. - -- Stuart Using The Bat! v2.03 Beta/45 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Aided by BayesIt! 0.4gm PGP Key available from ldap://keyserver.pgp.com Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP SDK 3.0 Comment: Key available from ldap://keyserver.pgp.com; iQA/AwUBQBeMO9ttnLhkydF1EQIyDgCfat9Jur+xFWXbxV8RqrY+XqVzELgAoNe0 yoN/H3WOZE+iEN7gq2jiCA9R =888z -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: upgrade: WARNING!
Dear Jean, @28-Jan-2004, 10:50 +0100 (28-Jan 09:50 UK time) Jean Site [JS] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Marck: is may indeed work, but make sure you switch the accounts to POP3 first and backup the messages you want to keep safe from any IMAP accounts. JS you switch the accounts to POP3 first! JS How can I do that? You can only do that while upgrading from v1 to v2. You can't do it if (as you are) you are already running v2. While in v1, just change the Account properties | Transport settings from IMAP to POP3. (PS: nice trim to context - thank you!). -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v2.03.47 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 1 ' pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Moving a thread?
How does one move an entire thread to another folder? Everything I try with dragging just moves the top-most message. jon -- Jonathan Wayne [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Moving a thread?
Hello jwayne, Wednesday, January 28, 2004, 7:56:51 AM, you wrote: j How does one move an entire thread to another folder? Everything I j try with dragging just moves the top-most message. The only thing I can think of is to Highlight the topmost message in the thread, press CTRL * to expand the thread, select the thread messages and move them that way. -- Leif (TB list moderator and fellow end user). Using The Bat! 2.03.47 under Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 on a Pentium 4 2GHz with 512MB Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Moving a thread?
Hi Jon How does one move an entire thread to another folder? Everything I try with dragging just moves the top-most message. I just expand the thread and highlight all the messages then drag and drop that lot. Don't know if it's the most efficient way of doing this but it works. -- Steve Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Moving a thread?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 j How does one move an entire thread to another folder? Everything I try with j dragging just moves the top-most message. Highlight the root message, press Ctrl+Shift+V, select the destination, /et voila/. - -- Stuart Using The Bat! v2.03 Beta/45 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Aided by BayesIt! 0.4gm PGP Key available from ldap://keyserver.pgp.com When two egotists meet, it's an I for an I. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP SDK 3.0 Comment: Key available from ldap://keyserver.pgp.com; iQA/AwUBQBfRedttnLhkydF1EQIcMACdEyr1ocB6+tCPa67G6N4NTFmPoNMAn0lw 8VpOZIxCpbHDzHRPPdo776o/ =kUEp -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Moving a thread?
Hallo jwayne, On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:56:51 -0500GMT (28-1-04, 15:56 +0100, where I live), you wrote: j How does one move an entire thread to another folder? Everything I try with j dragging just moves the top-most message. Select the root message Right mouse click Thread Move or Select the root message Ctrl+Shift+V -- Groetjes, Roelof Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Moving a thread?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 SM I just expand the thread and highlight all the messages then drag and SM drop that lot. Don't know if it's the most efficient way of doing this SM but it works. Indeed it does, but the Ctrl+Shift+V method has the advantage of not requiring you to more you hands from the keyboard... - -- Stuart Using The Bat! v2.03 Beta/45 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Aided by BayesIt! 0.4gm PGP Key available from ldap://keyserver.pgp.com If it can't be expressed in figures, it is not science; it is opinion. - - L. Long -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP SDK 3.0 Comment: Key available from ldap://keyserver.pgp.com; iQA/AwUBQBfUV9ttnLhkydF1EQKz8ACdE9TvJTdPwOj8WZPcewmz7PSz8l8AnRJo hdAqiVk/1oGZU9Bbx5iwGELq =ffoX -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Keyboard shortcut
Hello, I have forgotten how to configure a keyboard shortcut-- could someone please help with this? I would like if possible to combine the ALT + L command (which I use a lot) into one stroke. Thanks in advance. -- Pat A Canadian in Houston Using The Bat! v2.02.3 CE on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Keyboard shortcut
Hello P.Johnson, I have forgotten how to configure a keyboard shortcut-- could someone please help with this? I would like if possible to combine the ALT + L command (which I use a lot) into one stroke. Try Alt+F12 -- Best regards, Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain) Using The Bat! v2.01.3 Winamp OFF: Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Problems Installing K9
Hi dAniel, Monday, January 26, 2004, 12:22:40 AM, you wrote: on Sun, 25 Jan 2004 21:17:10 + Doug Weller wrote: DW My wife is trying to install K9 on 1.63. It looks set up correctly, DW but she gets the message 'Cannot connect to server'. DW Any suggestions as to where we may have gone wrong? look at the port and IP settings in TheBat, if it's the same as on what K9 is listening. But aren't they supposed to be different? TheBat! should show as the port, for instance. Thanks. Doug -- Doug Weller Moderator, sci.archaeology.moderated Submissions to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Doug and Helen's Dogs: http://www.dougandhelen.com Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: upgrade: WARNING!
Jonathan Angliss wrote: I can give you hope Thank you for your post. I have come to a workable solution for now, while I anxiously await the stability and feature set that The Bat's potential hints at. -- Ken Green Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
my solution
Well my saga, as Marck so aptly described it, is coming to an end. I realized that upgrading my main account - that I depend on for business - wasn't the best idea on my part. I knew there were issues with IMAP and tried it anyway. I gotta take responsibility for that. I have reverted back to 1.62r on my main machine. I plan to continue trying out the betas on my laptop. There is some cool stuff in v2, but at this point (for me) v2 is not working well enough to commit to fully. One thing I discovered that has solved much of my functionality need is that the IMAP implementation in 1.62r - while very limited - does offer me the one thing I really wanted. Remember that one of the main reasons I want to use IMAP is to be able to stay in synch with sent mail from other locations - keeping a Sent Mail folder synchronized across machines. I didn't know this until recently, but if I invoke Mail Dispatcher (1.62r allows Dispatcher for IMAP Accounts) and manually select the Sent Mail folder from the drop-down list, I can select those messages to be downloaded, and they end up in my Sent Mail folder locally. Of course this isn't automatic (and technically, not really IMAP), but it gets me what I want. No more having to remember to Bcc myself! I don't know if this is common knowledge or not, but being able to maintain some level of synchronization of Sent Mail was very important. This was a big deal for me and gives me the freedom to wait for v2 to mature. As always, thanks for the patience and guidance here... -- Ken Green Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Address book reliability
Greetings, If I have posted this several times please accept my apologies. I have had no reply, and I suspect I may have done something wrong and (whisper) unspeakable, like (tiny whisper) trying to post in html. I am posting the same message, but this time, I hope, in good ol' plain text. Please forgive any breach of TBUDL etiquite. (spelling???) I have used The Bat! for a couple of years now, but always with another program for my contacts. I like tB's address book, and would like to use it exclusively for my contacts, as I then get the advantages of being able to filter etc. from it. Can any experienced, long term Bat users please offer an opinion about the reliability of The Bat's address book when used as the only contact manager? I need a rock solid one, as my business involves people, and contact records are critical for me. I have discovered that the web page fields can also carry a link to a file on the local computer, which is wonderful. Is it possible to have shortcuts to several files in this way, or only the one? I appreciate any comments people might care to offer for me. -- Many thanks, -- All blessings, Peter mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
New spam plugin
I'm fed up with all the crap and have decided to write a spam plugin today. Where's the SDK? And, why is the SDK download so well hidden? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New spam plugin
Hello tb, Wednesday, January 28, 2004, 2:08:00 PM, you wrote: tko I'm fed up with all the crap and have decided to write a spam tko plugin today. Where's the SDK? Don't any of the existing solutions work for you? -- Leif (TB list moderator and fellow end user). Using The Bat! 2.03.47 under Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 on a Pentium 4 2GHz with 512MB Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New spam plugin
Dear Tb, @28-Jan-2004, 15:08 -0600 (28-Jan 21:08 UK time) [EMAIL PROTECTED] [T] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: T I'm fed up with all the crap and have decided T to write a spam plugin today. Where's the SDK? T And, why is the SDK download so well hidden? Wrong list. Please refer to the TBUDLInfo page in the footer for details of the TBDEV list for plug-in developers. Also on that page is the link to the archive, where you can find details of the SDK. -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v2.03.47 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 1 ' pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New spam plugin
Hello [EMAIL PROTECTED], on Wednesday, 28. January 2004, at 15:08:00 [GMT -0600] you wrote: I'm fed up with all the crap and have decided to write a spam plugin today. A new Spam Plugin? There are several which work perfectly. By the way, IMO the list for Plugin development is TheBat! DEV [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Ciao Thomas Mailer: TheBat! 2.03.47 OS: Windows XP Service Pack 1 PGP:PGP 8.0 | Key: 0xABBB7287 HP: http://www.thebatworld.de Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
From column format
At one point, I seem to recall having changed the From column in the message list listview so that it did not display anything but [EMAIL PROTECTED] How do I do this, or is my memory mistaking another client? Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
To, BCC, basics
Aside from using BCC, which is stripped by the server, in what other instances might there be no To: header in a delivered e-mail message? Can anyone think of anything? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New spam plugin
-- Wednesday, January 28, 2004, 3:11:07 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello tb, Wednesday, January 28, 2004, 2:08:00 PM, you wrote: tko I'm fed up with all the crap and have decided to write a spam tko plugin today. Where's the SDK? Don't any of the existing solutions work for you? Almost but not quite, and I have tried many. This is further complicated by a bug I recently discovered in filtering, allowing some spam authors to author spam in such a way as to trip up TB's Kludge tokenization. The end result being filters will not catch X-Spam-Flag in spam which takes advantage of this parser shortcoming. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: To, BCC, basics
Hallo tb, On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:09:38 -0600GMT (28-1-04, 23:09 +0100, where I live), you wrote: tko Aside from using BCC, which is stripped by the server, in what other tko instances might there be no To: header in a delivered e-mail message? You could use a CC:, that'll show in the delivered message, but you wouldn't have a To: header. Apart from that a To: header isn't really necessary to get a message delivered. I could send you a message without a To: header and it'll still be delivered. Nor would I need a CC or a BCC, I couldn't do it with TB, but that's not the issue here. The only fields required by rfc2822 are From: and Date: And I wouldn't guarantee that a message without those two headers would be stopped before it arrives at your mail account. -- Groetjes, Roelof Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: To, BCC, basics
-- Wednesday, January 28, 2004, 5:01:35 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:09:38 -0600GMT (28-1-04, 23:09 +0100, where I live), you wrote: tko Aside from using BCC, which is stripped by the server, in what other tko instances might there be no To: header in a delivered e-mail message? [snip] I could send you a message without a To: header and it'll still be delivered. Nor would I need a CC or a BCC, I couldn't do it with TB, but that's not the issue here. Ok, I'd like that actually... Telnet to port 25, or whatever you like, and send me a message without a To/CC/BCC header. I want to see what the headers of this message look like. Thanks, -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New spam plugin
On Wednesday, January 28, 2004 at 5:43:03 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in the message New spam plugin mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: This is further complicated by a bug I recently discovered in filtering, allowing some spam authors to author spam in such a way as to trip up TB's Kludge tokenization. The end result being filters will not catch X-Spam-Flag in spam which takes advantage of this parser shortcoming. Have you reported this as a bug? -- Chris Quoting when replying to this message is good for your karma. There are three kinds of lies: Lies, Darn Lies, and Statistics. Using The Bat! v2.02.3 CE on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: New spam plugin
-- Wednesday, January 28, 2004, 6:02:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday, January 28, 2004 at 5:43:03 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in the message New spam plugin mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: This is further complicated by a bug I recently discovered in filtering, allowing some spam authors to author spam in such a way as to trip up TB's Kludge tokenization. The end result being filters will not catch X-Spam-Flag in spam which takes advantage of this parser shortcoming. Have you reported this as a bug? I used to report bugs, but eventually I stopped receiving replies and was then accused of not having licensed TB, when I have in fact over-licensed. Now my bug reports receive no replies. Everything changed after TB 2. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: To, BCC, basics
Hallo tb, On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 17:22:25 -0600GMT (29-1-04, 0:22 +0100, where I live), you wrote: tko Telnet to port 25, or whatever you like, and send me a message without a tko To/CC/BCC header. I want to see what the headers of this message look like. Okay, I'll try it telnetting -- Groetjes, Roelof Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: To, BCC, basics
On Wednesday, January 28, 2004 at 5:09:38 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in the message To, BCC, basics mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Aside from using BCC, which is stripped by the server, in what other instances might there be no To: header in a delivered e-mail message? Using telnet to access the SMTP server directly, I was able to send an e-mail with NO ADDED headers. Each server it passes through will add headers. In the message below, the servers added the Return-Path, Received, From, Bcc, Message-ID, X-OriginalArrivalTime, and Date headers themselves. Here is a copy of the message I sent: Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from X ([AAA.BBB.CCC.DDD]) by X (InterMail vM.6.00.05.02 201-2115-109-103-20031105) with ESMTP id [EMAIL PROTECTED] for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:47:28 -0500 Received: from ([192.168.0.2]) by X with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 28 Jan 2004 18:46:20 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bcc: Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Jan 2004 23:46:21.0956 (UTC) FILETIME=[EEEB6440:01C3E5F8] Date: 28 Jan 2004 18:46:21 -0500 No headers? -- Chris Quoting when replying to this message is good for your karma. The sooner you fall behind, the more time you have to catch up. Using The Bat! v2.02.3 CE on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: To, BCC, basics
On Wednesday, January 28, 2004, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote... Telnet to port 25, or whatever you like, and send me a message without a To/CC/BCC header. I want to see what the headers of this message look like. As a note... if you're seeing emails with a BCC header appearing, then the sending client has a bug. The mail server doesn't strip or remove those headers at all, the client shouldn't be putting them in. -- Jonathan Angliss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) All that glitters has a high refractive index. pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Test
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 A test for Allie. - -- Stuart Using The Bat! v2.03 Beta/45 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Aided by BayesIt! 0.4gm PGP Key available from ldap://keyserver.pgp.com The biggest problem with the younger generation these days is that I don't belong to it any more. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP SDK 3.0 Comment: Key available from ldap://keyserver.pgp.com; iQA/AwUBQBd+yNttnLhkydF1EQICrACg0A2wKUhPANArs4LYgrsRi9Jw09cAnRKG mFGcxPsTIckfWom0TE3bTS+9 =HF22 -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Bayesit: Sound on sucessful catch of Junk
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Thanks for that. I think that it it the fact that is the error sound that bothers me. - -- Stuart Using The Bat! v2.03 Beta/45 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Aided by BayesIt! 0.4gm PGP Key available from ldap://keyserver.pgp.com There are 3 kinds of people in this world...those who want things to happen, those that make things happen, and those who just wonder what the hell happened! -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP SDK 3.0 Comment: Key available from ldap://keyserver.pgp.com; iQA/AwUBQBd+gdttnLhkydF1EQIucwCeNZxVL0/euiCny+RReJg8S4QY15AAoLnd avzGhEWrMr9pHgYvNnnZWtae =NrTp -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Conflict in new version of Vet with POPFile and TheBat
A couple of days ago I wrote of a conflict between the new version of Vet anti-virus amd the POPFile and TheBat programs. I just received an email from Vet support in Australia (they are the Computer Associates company which produces the eTrust software among others) to say that as I was using TheBat I could safely switch off the email scanning section of their software; the file scanning part of Vet would immediately pick up any infected file if it was saved from TheBat as a separate file. The email scanning software would pick up a virus signature from within the Bat's message files and quarantine it but it was safely coccooned there anyway and the quarantine action would upset POPFile. It is encouraging that some such companies do know how their software interacts with programs other than the most well known. -- Gordon Woolf The Worsley Press Hastings, Victoria, Australia www.worsleypress.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] New Book: Success in Store - How to Start or Buy a Retail Business, Enjoy Running It and Make Money Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Passwords
I am still trying to figure out TheBat! I like to password protect my email accounts. I selected the select access password, but it only asks me for my password if I am downloading mail from my first account, not for my others. I also noticed if I select download all, it doesn't ask me for my password at all. How do I get it to password protect all of my accounts when I load the program? -- Robin Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Automatically retrieving email
I have checked the box in preferences to automatically check for email upon startup, but I always have to manually check. What am I doing wrong? Thanks -- Robin Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Automatically retrieving email
Hello Robin, Wednesday, January 28, 2004, 9:26:28 PM, Robin H. wrote: RH I have checked the box in preferences to automatically check for email RH upon startup, but I always have to manually check. What am I doing RH wrong? Account | Properties (Shft+Ctrl+P) | Options | select Periodical checking each and input the number of minutes or what ever. -- Best Regards, Greg Strong WinAmp Playing: Using The Bat! v2.03.47 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Automatically retrieving email
Wednesday, January 28, 2004, 10:40:52 PM, you wrote: GS Hello Robin, GS Wednesday, January 28, 2004, 9:26:28 PM, Robin H. wrote: RH I have checked the box in preferences to automatically check for email RH upon startup, but I always have to manually check. What am I doing RH wrong? GS Account | Properties (Shft+Ctrl+P) | Options | select Periodical GS checking each and input the number of minutes or what ever. I have that checked. It isn't the periodic checking that isn't working, it is when I startup. I have the box checked to get email on startup but it does not do it. -- Robin -- Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: To, BCC, basics
On Wednesday, January 28, 2004 at 6:22:25 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in the message To, BCC, basics mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: I could send you a message without a To: header and it'll still be delivered. Nor would I need a CC or a BCC, I couldn't do it with TB, but that's not the issue here. Ok, I'd like that actually... Telnet to port 25, or whatever you like, and send me a message without a To/CC/BCC header. I want to see what the headers of this message look like. See my message mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]. -- Chris Quoting when replying to this message is good for your karma. I generally avoid temptation unless I can't resist it. Using The Bat! v2.02.3 CE on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Passwords
On Wednesday, January 28, 2004 at 10:23:39 PM, Robin H. wrote in the message Passwords mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: I am still trying to figure out TheBat! I like to password protect my email accounts. I selected the select access password, but it only asks me for my password if I am downloading mail from my first account, not for my others. I also noticed if I select download all, it doesn't ask me for my password at all. How do I get it to password protect all of my accounts when I load the program? There are a number of options working together here. First, you must set and access password on all your accounts. Then, if the Allow send/fetch without entering access password options (Account Properties - Options) is set, you can check e-mail without entering the password. -- Chris Quoting when replying to this message is good for your karma. Today's Oxymoron: Same difference Using The Bat! v2.02.3 CE on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Automatically retrieving email
On Wednesday, January 28, 2004 at 10:50:19 PM, Robin H. wrote in the message Automatically retrieving email mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: I have that checked. It isn't the periodic checking that isn't working, it is when I startup. I have the box checked to get email on startup but it does not do it. In mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] you say that you have access passwords. Could these passwords be causing you other problem. Try disabling your access passwords temporarily and see what happens. -- Chris Quoting when replying to this message is good for your karma. Is reading in the bathroom considered Multitasking? Using The Bat! v2.02.3 CE on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: upgrade: WARNING!
Hello [EMAIL PROTECTED], Thursday, January 29, 2004, 6:04:02 AM, you wrote: kg Jonathan Angliss wrote: I can give you hope snip Anyone know where I can download v1.62r? I inadvertently kept 1.61 and discarded 1.62r -- Paul - Using The Bat! v1.61 on Windows 98 4.10 Build A ...Memory is a thing we forget with. Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: upgrade: WARNING!
Paul Berger wrote: Anyone know where I can download v1.62r? I inadvertently kept 1.61 and discarded 1.62r http://www.thegoat.net/public/TheBat/ (I assume this is OK since all require registration keys) -- Ken Green Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: upgrade: WARNING!
Anyone know where I can download v1.62r? I inadvertently kept 1.61 and discarded 1.62r http://www.thegoat.net/public/TheBat/ Also at http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/download.html Elaine Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: disable parallel mail catchup of all accounts
dAniel hAhler wrote: thebat should put all accounts into the connection center stack and process it account by account. Wouldn't that go against one of TheBat's main features over other clients (fast multi-threading)? When you say should do you mean give the user an option to do this? Personally I *love* that TB checks multiple accounts at once (I believe TB was one of the first clients to do this). This greatly reduces mail download time. -- Ken Green Using The Bat! v1.62r on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
