ing
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 5:13 AM
To: profox@leafe.com
Subject: Re: Filtering Oddity
So if you leave off the NOFILTER/READWRITE you have a read only file, so
"edits to this cursor would be written to the actual source table" would
not apply. It sounds like there are no circumstances wher
Of Fletcher
Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2019 10:30 AM
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: RE: Filtering Oddity
Peter,
It's been a while But I do know that this became a big issue when people
found out that changes to what they thought was a temporary table/cursor
were being made back to the
etes/fletcherjohnson
408-946-0960 - work
408-781-2345 - cell
-Original Message-
From: ProFox [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Peter Cushing
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 5:13 AM
To: profox@leafe.com
Subject: Re: Filtering Oddity
So if you leave off the NOFILTER/READWR
update table set flda="blah' where table.pk=temp2.pk -- && or thereabouts?
On 21-May-19 11:07 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
At 03:17 2019-05-21, AndyHC wrote:
+1
Not if you need to adjust the original table. I frequently do.
This idiom of filter and diddle is very useful when I am
At 11:24 2019-05-19, Koen Piller wrote:
Gene
If you would have used a select..where.. into cursor curTemp from myTable
into curosr myCursor than your next select statement could be
select...where...from myCursor into cursor Temp2 you are done.
easy quick and dirty.
Nope. Have you
At 03:17 2019-05-21, AndyHC wrote:
+1
Not if you need to adjust the original table. I frequently
do. This idiom of filter and diddle is very useful when I am
checking the coverage of a report's error checking.
[snip]
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
At 07:29 2019-05-19, Man-wai Chang wrote:
You can just watch the value of variable f. A valid filter expression
stored in variable f will not produce error.
What are you trying to do when you said "...would prefer just one
statement in the heat of debugging"?
Trying to restrict the
does
starting on page 91. There's probably some useful commentary in HG and FoxWiki
as well.
--
rk
-Original Message-
From: ProfoxTech On Behalf Of Peter Cushing
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 8:13 AM
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: Re: Filtering Oddity
So if you leave off the NOFILTER
ge-
> From: ProfoxTech On Behalf Of Peter Cushing
> Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 6:35 AM
> To: profoxt...@leafe.com
> Subject: Re: Filtering Oddity
>
> On 20/05/2019 19:39, Fletcher Johnson wrote:
>> Not sure where the "Had to be bad coding" comes in.
>>
AM
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: Re: Filtering Oddity
On 20/05/2019 19:39, Fletcher Johnson wrote:
> Not sure where the "Had to be bad coding" comes in.
>
> For example, if you did "select * from employee where last name = 'Smith'"
> you would get a cursor of onl
>
> I don't know if that behaviour was from an older VFP version but I don't
> remember it. Am I getting Alzheimer's? Somebody put me out of my
> misery :-)
Since VFP6 if you do a select that involves one table and is 100% optimisable,
it will just show you the actual table with a
On 20/05/2019 19:39, Fletcher Johnson wrote:
> Not sure where the "Had to be bad coding" comes in.
>
> For example, if you did "select * from employee where last name = 'Smith'"
> you would get a cursor of only those employees. The employee table would
> still be open, but VFP opened it again, in
+1
On 19-May-19 7:24 PM, Koen Piller wrote:
Gene
If you would have used a select..where.. into cursor curTemp from myTable
into curosr myCursor than your next select statement could be
select...where...from myCursor into cursor Temp2 you are done.
easy quick and dirty.
Regards,
Koen
in/FletcherJohnson
twitter.com/fletcherJ
strava.com/athletes/fletcherjohnson
408-946-0960 - work
408-781-2345 - cell
-Original Message-
From: ProFox [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Man-wai Chang
Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2019 9:42 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: Filtering Oddi
On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 12:01 AM Fletcher Johnson
wrote:
> 1) It used to be that a Select statement would be optimized by VFP to open
> the source table again, in another work area, and then set a filter on it.
> This was a problem when people thought they had a cursor and updated the
> contents,
Gene
If you would have used a select..where.. into cursor curTemp from myTable
into curosr myCursor than your next select statement could be
select...where...from myCursor into cursor Temp2 you are done.
easy quick and dirty.
Regards,
Koen
Op zo 19 mei 2019 om 16:29 schreef Man-wai Chang
> You
You can just watch the value of variable f. A valid filter expression
stored in variable f will not produce error.
What are you trying to do when you said "...would prefer just one
statement in the heat of debugging"?
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 6:46 AM Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> I do know
[mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Gene Wirchenko
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 3:46 PM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Filtering Oddity
Hello:
I was looking over a program preparatory to an enhancement. I
inserted a debugging browse statement in a branch that I was going to
add
Alan,
In that case we are talking about a complete different situations. I was
referring to a procedure to be applied in a multiuser app.
In your case you are best off with coding you, yourselve like best.
Regards,
Koen
Op vr 17 mei 2019 om 13:39 schreef Alan Bourke :
> On Fri, 17 May 2019, at
On Fri, 17 May 2019, at 12:25 PM, Koen Piller wrote:
> Richard,
> instead of grabbing all of your Data from the server and consequently
> filter to the data you require you could also consider to select just the
> subset of data you require in one go.
Definitely this in a deployed application.
customer. SET FILTER handles
> that
> >> quickly and simply without the overhead of running another query against
> >> the main database.
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> rk
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Pro
2019 2:55 PM
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: RE: Filtering Oddity
At 11:41 2019-05-15, Richard Kaye wrote:
Gene and Woody's point is that XBASE tools are quite useful for us when
developing/testing, not that they are necessarily preferable for
production code.
Exactly.
O
On 5/15/2019 6:23 PM, Richard Kaye wrote:
And here's a use case where SET FILTER can be quite useful in a production
application. Let's say you have a form that displays account receivable
transactions for a customer (invoices, payments, adjustments, etc.). You want
to be able to display only
e database, particularly if my filtering
queries are not as optimizable.
There are also other considerations to be taken into account such as how the
cursor is being used. For example, grids are not real happy when you mess with
the datasource.
The joy of VFP is the wide assortment of tools availa
Alan,
In this case select..into nofilter is according to me not the same as the
english no filter, it means 'select again and disregard the previous
select'
Regards,
Koen
Op do 16 mei 2019 om 10:49 schreef Alan Bourke :
> Depending on the select it might well just be filtering internally any
Depending on the select it might well just be filtering internally anyway,
hence the 'nofilter' clause.
--
Alan Bourke
alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm
On Thu, 16 May 2019, at 6:26 AM, Koen Piller wrote:
> Richard,
> what you describe is a matter of personal taste.
> There is no
, May 15, 2019 2:55 PM
> To: profoxt...@leafe.com
> Subject: RE: Filtering Oddity
>
> At 11:41 2019-05-15, Richard Kaye wrote:
> >Gene and Woody's point is that XBASE tools are quite useful for us when
> >developing/testing, not that they are necessarily preferable for
&
Of Gene Wirchenko
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2019 2:55 PM
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: RE: Filtering Oddity
At 11:41 2019-05-15, Richard Kaye wrote:
>Gene and Woody's point is that XBASE tools are quite useful for us when
>developing/testing, not that they are necessarily pref
At 11:41 2019-05-15, Richard Kaye wrote:
Gene and Woody's point is that XBASE tools are quite useful for us
when developing/testing, not that they are necessarily preferable
for production code.
Exactly.
One advantage that is particularly nice is that they are often
short,
+1
The Foxil
Le 15/05/2019 à 20:39, juer...@wondzinski.de a écrit :
We don't talk about endusers, we are the experts. Experts are using data
directly and edit directly in a browse. PAH!!
wOOdy
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription
Le 15/05/2019 à 20:36, Koen Piller a écrit :
Woody
And where is set filter in this respect?
Browse is not for end users, with a grid you are better of.
Koen
NO !
having begun with Fox Dos, I am very easy with command lines, on key label,
browse, ... a lot more easy than using the mouse ! And
At 11:01 2019-05-15, Koen Piller wrote:
Gene
I would like to see an actual situation where set filter is preferable over
select() according to you.
I put such a case in the message of mine that you replied to!
Regards
Koen
Op wo 15 mei 2019 om 19:49 schreef Gene Wirchenko
> At
Subject: Re: Filtering Oddity
Woody
And where is set filter in this respect?
Browse is not for end users, with a grid you are better of.
Koen
Op wo 15 mei 2019 om 20:32 schreef
> I totally agree with Gene. xBase was originally developed for
> interactive use, and those commands ar
det: Mittwoch, 15. Mai 2019 20:37
> An: ProFox Email List
> Betreff: Re: Filtering Oddity
>
> Woody
> And where is set filter in this respect?
> Browse is not for end users, with a grid you are better of.
> Koen
>
>
>
[excessive quoting removed by server]
We don't talk about endusers, we are the experts. Experts are using data
directly and edit directly in a browse. PAH!!
wOOdy
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: ProFox Im Auftrag von Koen Piller
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. Mai 2019 20:37
An: ProFox Email List
Betreff: Re: Filtering Oddity
; some magic...
>
> Believe me, xBase commands are even better than sliced bread!
>
> wOOdy
>
>
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: ProFox Im Auftrag von Koen Piller
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. Mai 2019 20:02
> An: ProFox Email List
> Betreff: Re: Filtering Oddi
At 16:43 2019-05-14, Ted Roche wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 6:46 PM Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>
>use cwkf
>set filter to validto>={^2019.01.01}
>count
>browse
>
> I do know that I can do
>f=filter()+" and empty(wfd)"
>
An: ProFox Email List
Betreff: Re: Filtering Oddity
Gene
I would like to see an actual situation where set filter is preferable over
select() according to you.
Regards
Koen
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http
Gene
I would like to see an actual situation where set filter is preferable over
select() according to you.
Regards
Koen
Op wo 15 mei 2019 om 19:49 schreef Gene Wirchenko
> At 02:00 2019-05-15, Koen Piller wrote:
> >Hi,
> >The use of 'Set Filter' in VFP is outdated. Nowadays we use
>
At 02:00 2019-05-15, Koen Piller wrote:
Hi,
The use of 'Set Filter' in VFP is outdated. Nowadays we use
Selectfrom...Where...into
Who is "we"?
Your select statement does not do the same thing. I use set
filter to check for data having certain properties especially when I
am
Yes, SET FILTER always need to use macro substitution _expr!
Using SQL is also a better solution usually, depending how you move
the record pointer.
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 4:55 PM Johan Nel wrote:
>
> I realize I am not a VFP guy, but would the following not work? In
> Clipper/VO this will
On 15/05/2019 10:00, Koen Piller wrote:
> Hi,
> The use of 'Set Filter' in VFP is outdated. Nowadays we use
> Selectfrom...Where...into
> Regards,
> Koen
>
Hey, leave my set filter alone... :-)
I have found a few uses for it that work brilliantly and I couldn't
think of an alternative.
Hi,
The use of 'Set Filter' in VFP is outdated. Nowadays we use
Selectfrom...Where...into
Regards,
Koen
Op wo 15 mei 2019 om 10:55 schreef Johan Nel :
> I realize I am not a VFP guy, but would the following not work? In
> Clipper/VO this will work.
>
> set filter to &(filter() + " and
I realize I am not a VFP guy, but would the following not work? In
Clipper/VO this will work.
set filter to &(filter() + " and empty(wfd)")
On 2019/05/15 01:43, Ted Roche wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 6:46 PM Gene Wirchenko wrote:
use cwkf
set filter to
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 6:46 PM Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>
>use cwkf
>set filter to validto>={^2019.01.01}
>count
>browse
>
> I do know that I can do
>f=filter()+" and empty(wfd)"
>set filter to
> but in the heat of
Hello:
I was looking over a program preparatory to an enhancement. I
inserted a debugging browse statement in a branch that I was going to
add some error reporting to. The branch, oddly, did not get
executed. Dig, dig ...
use cwkf
set filter to
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 10:24 PM, Dan Covill dan.cov...@outlook.com wrote:
Another case in point on this idea:
My auto repair shop client asked me to alter the phone fields on his
Customer and Work Order records.
They were originally labelled Home Phone and Work Phone. He wanted a
third #,
Here's a simple one...for VFP9sp2
If I want to permit the input of a phone number, what is the best way to
ensure only digits?
I would like to permit input with, and without, areacode or countrycode...
so, allow both
800-555-1212
and
555-1212
or even
1212
Use a
I've found my clients are delighted if I give them room to type in what
they mean, like:
603-555-1212 weekends
or 888-555-1212 x1234
or 800-555-1212 9-noon MWF
or 603-555-1212 or -1213
or my favorite JUniper6-2352
Unless you're using a computerized means to dial the phone, let them type
On 2014-11-13 19:23, Ted Roche wrote:
I've found my clients are delighted if I give them room to type in what
they mean, like:
603-555-1212 weekends
or 888-555-1212 x1234
or 800-555-1212 9-noon MWF
or 603-555-1212 or -1213
or my favorite JUniper6-2352
Unless you're using a computerized
:01 -0500
From: mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: Re: Filtering
On 2014-11-13 19:23, Ted Roche wrote:
I've found my clients are delighted if I give them room to type in what
they mean, like:
603-555-1212 weekends
or 888-555-1212 x1234
or 800
Thanks.
Mike
mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com wrote:
On 2014-11-13 19:23, Ted Roche wrote:
I've found my clients are delighted if I give them room to type in what
they mean, like:
603-555-1212 weekends
or 888-555-1212 x1234
or 800-555-1212 9-noon MWF
or 603-555-1212 or -1213
Thanks, Ted.
Mike
Ted Roche wrote:
I've found my clients are delighted if I give them room to type in what
they mean, like:
603-555-1212 weekends
or 888-555-1212 x1234
or 800-555-1212 9-noon MWF
or 603-555-1212 or -1213
or my favorite JUniper6-2352
Unless you're using a computerized
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 22:59:01 -0500
From: mbsoftwaresoluti...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: Re: Filtering
On 2014-11-13 19:23, Ted Roche wrote:
I've found my clients are delighted if I give them room to type in what
they mean, like:
603-555-1212
What about building a class based on container ? With one field for the number
formatted WITH ..., one for the 'comment' and a spinner for priority ...
If you have more than one phone number to deal with and you don't want to build
a child table, you can store them in a memo field : one
Hi Everyone,
Have to start munging some URLs as verizon bounces the messages
containing them. Sorry for any inconvenience.
--
Regards,
Pete
http://pete-theisen.com/
http://elect-pete-theisen.com/
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription
Who do you think you are - My Mother???
-Original Message-
From: profox-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of
Michael Madigan
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:14 AM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [NF] Anybody using Barracuda web filtering?
You're only
Barracuda web filtering?
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Michael Madigan mmadi10...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Is anybody using Barracuda web filtering and if so, how do you like
it?
As of about 3-4 years ago I've heard:
a) good things about the unit/service and the job it does. People seem
to love it.
b) I
Is anybody using Barracuda web filtering and if so, how do you like it?
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Michael Madigan mmadi10...@yahoo.com wrote:
Is anybody using Barracuda web filtering and if so, how do you like it?
As of about 3-4 years ago I've heard:
a) good things about the unit/service and the job it does. People seem
to love it.
b) I don't want
Thanks for your imput
- Original Message -
From: M Jarvis brewda...@gmail.com
To: profox@leafe.com
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 7:57 PM
Subject: Re: [NF] Anybody using Barracuda web filtering?
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Michael Madigan mmadi10...@yahoo.com wrote
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Michael Madigan mmadi10...@yahoo.com wrote:
Is anybody using Barracuda web filtering and if so, how do you like it?
PITA
lists like this or off of yahoo and google get caught up in it every day.
Thumbs down from me.
--
Stephen Russell
] Anybody using Barracuda web filtering?
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Michael Madigan mmadi10...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Is anybody using Barracuda web filtering and if so, how do you like it?
PITA
lists like this or off of yahoo and google get caught up in it every day.
Thumbs
[mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf
Of Stephen Russell
Sent: Thursday, 14 June 2012 9:43 AM
To: ProFox Email List
Subject: Re: [NF] Anybody using Barracuda web filtering?
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Michael Madigan mmadi10...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Is anybody using Barracuda web filtering
most web filtering software is just as hopeless as email filtering. If it is
to eliminate the spam and so on, it ends up eliminating real emails. Ive had
people subscribe to our training website thru gmail because they know they
will never get thru their company filter - often barracuda
You're only supposed to be doing work-related stuff, not surf for sports or
games.
- Original Message -
From: Kurt @ VR-FX v...@optonline.net
To: profox@leafe.com
Cc:
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 9:26 PM
Subject: Re: [NF] Anybody using Barracuda web filtering?
I agree - but, from
, June 13, 2012 10:14 PM
Subject: RE: [NF] Anybody using Barracuda web filtering?
most web filtering software is just as hopeless as email filtering. If it is
to eliminate the spam and so on, it ends up eliminating real emails. Ive had
people subscribe to our training website thru gmail because
What would you recommend for a 15-user Web Filtering solution? We're trying to
prevent employees from surfing dangerous sites to prevent malware from being
picked up.
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com
Ken Kixmoeller/fh wrote:
On Feb 19, 2009, at 10:13 PM, Efren Pedroza wrote:
DateFiled '01/01/2008' and I get a Type Mismath Error.
As you've seen, there are several ways to skin that cat.
Here's another:
DateFiled Date(2008,1,1)
___
Post
This is the format I prefer to use. It avoids trouble when the application
might have a different SET DATE which can bite you with CTOD()
Tracy
-Original Message-
From: Vince Teachout
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 9:27 AM
Ken Kixmoeller/fh wrote:
On Feb 19, 2009, at 10:13 PM, Efren
Was the DATE(y,m,d) syntax in VFP6? I thought it came with 7 or 8.
On Feb 20, 2009, at 8:25 AM, Tracy Pearson wrote:
This is the format I prefer to use. It avoids trouble when the
application
might have a different SET DATE which can bite you with CTOD()
Tracy
-Original
According to the VFP 6 help file, it was.
Tracy
-Original Message-
From: Ken Kixmoeller/fh
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 9:31 AM
Was the DATE(y,m,d) syntax in VFP6? I thought it came with 7 or 8.
On Feb 20, 2009, at 8:25 AM, Tracy Pearson wrote:
This is the format I prefer to
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Ken Kixmoeller/fh
foxh...@information-architecture.com wrote:
Was the DATE(y,m,d) syntax in VFP6? I thought it came with 7 or 8.
Indeed it was:
ldDate = DATE( [ nYear, nMonth, nDay ]
A+
jml
___
Post Messages to:
On Feb 20, 2009, at 8:30 AM, Tracy Pearson wrote:
According to the VFP 6 help file, it was.
Thanks ---
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list:
Hi All, can some one help me on how to filter some table based on a Date
Filed ?
I'm using VF 6.0 and when I go to table properties and type the filter like
this
DateFiled '01/01/2008' and I get a Type Mismath Error.
Thanks in advance
___
Post
Try DateFiled ctod('01/01/2008')
John Harvey
-Original Message-
From: profox-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf
Of Efren Pedroza
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 10:13 PM
To: profox@leafe.com; profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: Filtering on Date field
Hi All
On Feb 19, 2009, at 10:13 PM, Efren Pedroza wrote:
DateFiled '01/01/2008' and I get a Type Mismath Error.
DateFiled {^2008-01-01}
Dates aren't glorified text fields in FP/VFP.
Depending on your STRICTDATE settings. Look up SET STRICTDATE in Help.
Ken
, 2009 11:13 PM, Efren Pedroza wrote:
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 22:13:20 -0600
From: Efren Pedroza
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
cc:
Subject: Filtering on Date field
Hi All, can some one help me on how to filter some table based on a Date
Filed ?
I'm using VF 6.0 and when I go to table properties and type
Thanks !!!
It works
-Original Message-
From: profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On
Behalf Of John
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 10:32 PM
To: profoxt...@leafe.com
Subject: RE: Filtering on Date field
Try DateFiled ctod('01/01/2008')
John Harvey
Brian Abbott wrote:
It's there on TB3 ...
??? There is no TB3?!?!?? It's only on version 2?!?!?!?!?
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/thunderbird/
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance:
MB Software Solutions General Account wrote:
I *know* a past version of TB used to have filtering possible with the
Body tag. I used to search for select crap within the body and if
found, I'd delete the email. I still get tons of crap email so I went
to add a filter last night and noticed
MB Software Solutions General Account wrote:
Brian Abbott wrote:
It's there on TB3 ...
??? There is no TB3?!?!?? It's only on version 2?!?!?!?!?
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/thunderbird/
Sorry, blond moment ;-)
Yes, it's there on my TB2
--
Cheers
Brian Abbott
Brian Abbott wrote:
MB Software Solutions General Account wrote:
Brian Abbott wrote:
It's there on TB3 ...
??? There is no TB3?!?!?? It's only on version 2?!?!?!?!?
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/thunderbird/
Sorry, blond moment ;-)
Yes, it's there on my TB2
And I thought it was
computer
or email client you check your email from.
You'd need:
+ IMAP
+ A cronjob either running on your server or on a client machine that is
always on.
IMAP is superior to POP3 anyway.
I agree with you. IMAP is better. That's what I have. I do already
have some filtering in place
It's there on TB3 ...
MB Software Solutions General Account wrote:
I *know* a past version of TB used to have filtering possible with the
Body tag. I used to search for select crap within the body and if
found, I'd delete the email. I still get tons of crap email so I went
to add a filter
I *know* a past version of TB used to have filtering possible with the
Body tag. I used to search for select crap within the body and if
found, I'd delete the email. I still get tons of crap email so I went
to add a filter last night and noticed that Body was no longer an
option
Now, here's a message worth filtering and rejecting!
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 10:39 AM, Davuluri, Murali K.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You have received a secure message from Davuluri, Murali K. entitled, RE:
Word document:.
You may view the message (before 05/16/2008) at the following web
Let's filter duplicates too.
Let's filter duplicates too.
--- On Thu, 5/1/08, Ted Roche [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Ted Roche [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ADMIN] Filtering, was Re: Word document:
To: profox@leafe.com
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thursday, May 1, 2008, 10:55 AM
Now
Well a client of mine has gotten a nasty bit of
ad-ware that pops up you're computer is infected
over and over again and points him to a website.
I think one of his weekend workers was surfing for
porn and downloaded a codec which turned out to be
ad-ware.
So this is strike two for that
Internet filtering software and what are you
using?
Well a client of mine has gotten a nasty bit of
ad-ware that pops up you're computer is infected
over and over again and points him to a website.
I think one of his weekend workers was surfing for
porn and downloaded a codec which turned out
Michael Madigan wrote:
Well a client of mine has gotten a nasty bit of
ad-ware that pops up you're computer is infected
over and over again and points him to a website.
I think one of his weekend workers was surfing for
porn and downloaded a codec which turned out to be
ad-ware.
So
Michael Madigan wrote:
Well a client of mine has gotten a nasty bit of
ad-ware that pops up you're computer is infected
over and over again and points him to a website.
What is everyone using? I just want to block porno
sites for now. I want it to be easy and not bog down
the system.
It's not him, it's some pimply-faced kid he hires for the weekend to watch the
storage facility.
The kid isn't supposed to be surfin at all, but on a sunday afternoon the
customer traffic there is so slow that the kid legitimately doesn't have
anything to do.
I'm not even sure why
93 matches
Mail list logo
