This message: 14/02/2000 08:09 GMT.
Sunday, February 13, 2000, 11:46:49 PM, Nick wrote:
ND Color me Libertarian, but as obnoxious as Steve can be put me down on
ND the side of free speech. I prefer to do my own censorship via
ND filtering. Count me out of any witch hunts ya'll are trying
Hello,
On Monday, February 14, 2000 at 09:06:51 GMT + (which was 1:06 AM
where I live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
And you only have yourself to blame if you rise to his bait.
Other than bashing another list member, is there any point to this
thread? Paula posted a formal
Hi Januk,
On 14 February 2000 at 01:46:58 GMT -0800 (which was 09:46 where I
live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote and made these points:
JA Other than bashing another list member, is there any point to this
JA thread? Paula posted a formal complaint, as did Larry, and I
JA respect them for their
Hello Januk Aggarwal,
On Sun, 13 Feb 2000 17:45:30 -0800 GMT your local time,
which was Monday, February 14, 2000, 8:45:30 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Januk Aggarwal wrote:
Hello John,
On Sunday, February 13, 2000 at 10:31:18 GMT +0900 (which was 5:31 PM where I
live) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello Allie Martin,
On Sun, 13 Feb 2000 22:03:52 -0500 GMT your local time,
which was Monday, February 14, 2000, 10:03:52 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Allie Martin wrote:
I wonder what happened to the scroll-lock key and why the
majority of apps nowadays, Agent being one notable
On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 17:54:25 +0700, tracer wrote:
If tou ever pressed the scroll lock key by accident in any of the
Agents windows you may have noticed that scroll lock behaviour is
variable per window in Agent and if you donot notice it some extreem
strange behaviour can result...
Hi all!
After an upgrade etc. I am BACK! :D I know this thread went way off topic but I
thought I
would give my .02 re: the original post
:D
On Saturday, February 12, 2000 at 18:09:08 , Homesick scribbled:
HM The message highlighted / viewed is the last viewed message from some
HM
Hi there!
On 13 Feb 00, at 17:34, Januk Aggarwal wrote
about "Re: Why not highlighting the newest...":
For Russian, it _is_. It's all the same as for you. When I need to
start typing Russian rather then English (or whatever Latin-based
language), I just press right Ctrl button once,
Hello Alexander V. Kiselev,
On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 18:25:43 +0300 GMT your local time,
which was Monday, February 14, 2000, 10:25:43 PM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Alexander V. Kiselev wrote:
Nope, nothing. *Any* keyboard can be made Russian: to do so, one just
needs to re-label the keys. This is
Dah hit the wrong button on that last one, sorry...
The list may be silent about him because kill-filters are in use or
others as myself have grown immune to it
LB Well, I personally can't grow immune to such foolishness.
That's the point of kill filters, you just have it automatically mark
Hi Allie,
On 14 February 2000 at 18:48:41 GMT -0500 (which was 23:48 where I
live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote and made these points:
MDP A tragedy, IMHO. I have use Quick Search recently. I would
MDP actually prefer to have had to type Ctrl-Q (or some such) to
MDP start it. You're
On Monday, February 14, 2000, 5:51:16 PM, John De Hoog wrote:
Instead of using the Sorting rules, create a Kill filter for
Originators and add the unwanted address to the list
I finally got a filter to work by simply changing the "Location" to
"Anywhere". What I don't understand is why the
Monday, February 14, 2000
Hello Bat-users,
Is there any easy way to print the log out???
--
Best regards,
tracer
Using theBAT 1.41 Beta/3
NO MICROSOFT VIRUS INFECTIONS
mail to : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
using FireTalk: 321338
--
There is one other trick I use for getting through the unread messages
in a folder: and that is to set the View options to "only unread
messages" which gives me a threaded structure of unread messages in
each folder. And it dows put me at the first unread message when I
change folders.
--
Well, I'm back with my favourite pet peeve. And since I'm in a bad
mood, I'll be blunt. Although TB! is, without question, my favourite
email client, it SUCKS in a big-huge way when it comes to handling big
email attachments. Yes, I am talking multiple-megabyte (sometimes
upwards of 15 megs)
Hello Allie Martin,
On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 09:25:58 -0500 GMT your local time,
which was Monday, February 14, 2000, 9:25:58 PM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Allie Martin wrote:
On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 17:54:25 +0700, tracer wrote:
Well, if you know that the scroll-lock key works then there's
On Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 10:58:22AM -0500, Soth wrote:
So, can anybody suggest a solid email client that intuitively handles
multiple POP accounts, has excellent filtering features, a reasonable
interface, and that doesn't kick the bucket when it comes to a big
email?
PMMail2000.
--
Hello tracer and Bat Buddies,
Is there any easy way to print the log out???
Yes...Print account.log, tucked away in the account's directory.
--
Unequivocally,
Jason Thompson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Bat! v1.41 Beta/3
--
--
View the
Morning Januk Aggarwal,
RIT has said that customizable keyboard mappings would be available
in Version 2. Hopefully they make it so that if one person comes up
with a good one, it can be distributed and imported onto other
computers very easily.
I recently requested this feature for
On Mon, Feb 14, 2000 at 10:58:22AM -0500, Soth wrote:
So, can anybody suggest a solid email client that intuitively handles
multiple POP accounts, has excellent filtering features, a reasonable
interface, and that doesn't kick the bucket when it comes to a big
email?
PMMail2000.
Monday, February 14, 2000, 9:07:18 AM, Soth wrote:
*grin* Thank you. I love the interface. ;-) Now to put it under some
of the same grueling tests that I've put TB! through... (ie/ 32000 +
stored messages, see how it handles my joke list traffic, etc...)
Well, it handled my workload
On Monday, February 14, 2000, 8:20:58 AM, Steve Lamb wrote:
So, can anybody suggest a solid email client that intuitively handles
multiple POP accounts, has excellent filtering features, a reasonable
interface, and that doesn't kick the bucket when it comes to a big
email?
PMMail2000.
Monday, February 14, 2000, 11:54:00 AM, Nick wrote:
Perhaps I didn't give it long enough, but when I realised that it couldn't
thread messages... or if it could, I certainly didn't find a way... I
dumped it and found TB... and have been here ever since. :o)
It does not thread.
--
Hi there!
On 14 Feb 00, at 11:54, Nick Andriash wrote
about "Re: The Bat! - bug report":
PMMail2000.
I tried that Program a while back, and a few things I found I didn't like.
For one, I just couldn't get PMMail to thread messages. It would group the
messages of the same subject
MDP A tragedy, IMHO. I have use Quick Search recently. I would actually
MDP prefer to have had to type Ctrl-Q (or some such) to start it. You're
MDP quite right with this.
heh, or maybe even just 'q'. ;p
-tom!
--
Hopin' this said *something* useful, [EMAIL PROTECTED] out.
--
NR BTW I have asked a question on the list, no-one ever answered, what a waste of
damn time.
Perhaps nobody knew the answer? I've never used LDAP in my life...
-tom!
--
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
I'm having troubles getting my filters to work properly.
I have one filter that is set to automatically mark messages read.
I have another filter that is set to move messages into a given folder
and delete them from the server.
I have the 'mark read' one above the 'move and delete' one, but
Monday, February 14, 2000, 2:21:09 PM, Tom wrote:
hopefully obvious to a human, I want these messages marked read and
deposited in the correct folder, but I can't figure out what order the
filters execute in the sorting office.
I've always assumed that they are run in order. Are you
Hello list,
Oh come off it, Paula. I respond in the tone given, nothing more.
Humm a bit of self-deception going on there I would say.
Don't like it, tough.
Yes, very philosophical.
That's what Hitler said to the Jews wasn't it? :-/
Note that the person who originated
Hello rellieb-jean,
On Tue, 15 Feb 2000 at 08:39:36 [GMT +1000], you wrote:
Oh come off it, Paula. I respond in the tone given, nothing more.
rj Humm a bit of self-deception going on there I would say.
Enough on this topic! The matter is resolved, and any further comments
only serve to
AM Moving back and forth from an editor or word processor with
AM the standard cursor movements limitations etc. is no problem
AM whatsoever. I guess it's like speaking two languages fluently.
JA If one doesn't like TB's keyboard interface, they should go use a
JA different product and
Hello Tom,
On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 at 14:11:54 [GMT -0800], you wrote:
TB Well, I personally can't grow immune to such foolishness.
TP That's the point of kill filters, you just have it automatically mark
TP all posts by him read, and then you don't read them. Therefore, you
TP are immune.
This
On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 08:20:58 -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
So, can anybody suggest a solid email client that intuitively
handles multiple POP accounts, has excellent filtering features, a
reasonable interface, and that doesn't kick the bucket when it
comes to a big email?
PMMail2000.
On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 13:33:34 -0800, Tom Plunket wrote:
MDP A tragedy, IMHO. I have use Quick Search recently. I would
MDP actually prefer to have had to type Ctrl-Q (or some such) to
MDP start it. You're quite right with this.
heh, or maybe even just 'q'. ;p
*chuckle*. Here am I
On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 14:11:54 -0800, Tom Plunket wrote:
LB Well, I personally can't grow immune to such foolishness.
That's the point of kill filters, you just have it automatically mark
all posts by him read, and then you don't read them. Therefore, you
are immune.
What about the
On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 10:58:22 -0500, Soth wrote:
Well, I'm back with my favourite pet peeve. And since I'm in a bad
mood, I'll be blunt. Although TB! is, without question, my favourite
email client, it SUCKS in a big-huge way when it comes to handling big
email attachments. Yes, I am
Hello Allie Martin,
On Mon, 14 Feb 2000 18:55:06 -0500 GMT your local time,
which was Tuesday, February 15, 2000, 6:55:06 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Allie Martin wrote:
Yes, I'm a bad, bad boy for sending email that big. Who cares.
Fix the problem. Why should TB! use in excess of 192
I've always had a problem with most of the filters that TB sets up. For
instance, here is the From: line from a spam I just got:
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Now I've created a filter through Special/Create Filter, and have created
two of my own on this address, and every variant
Hi, all,
Nick Andriash wrote...
NA Now I've created a filter through Special/Create Filter, and have created
NA two of my own on this address, and every variant thereof, but to no avail.
NA I just cannot make the filter stick.
Instead of using the Sorting rules, create a Kill filter for
Hello Soth,
On Monday, February 14, 2000 at 10:58:22 GMT -0500 (which was 15/02/2000
22:58 GMT +0700 my Local Time) you told to the list:
S Well, I'm back with my favourite pet peeve. And since I'm in a bad
S mood, I'll be blunt. Although TB! is, without question, my favourite
S email
40 matches
Mail list logo
