AM> On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 20:38:11 +, John Rainer wrote:
>> I've been using The Bat now for several weeks and been generally
>> very pleased with it. The only feature that I find a bit frustrating
>> compared to other mail clients that I've used is word wrapping.
>> Apart from pasted material n
Hello users,
For those of you who weren't following the filter thread...
Chris VanHonk's message finally convinced me to write the how-to on
filters that I promised to do ages ago. It's long, but very detailed.
I wrote it in a cpl of hours, so there are bound to be some mistakes.
Please take a l
Hello Chris,
Ok, this finally convinced me to write the how-to on filters that I
promised to do ages ago. It's long, but very detailed. I wrote it in a
cpl of hours, so there are bound to be some mistakes. Please take a
look at it and let me know of the ones you find or any omissions, or
places
Hello Allie Martin,
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 07:37:13 -0500 GMT your local time,
which was Tuesday, March 21, 2000, 7:37:13 PM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Allie Martin wrote:
> Things have been very smooth for me as well. Apparently I had
> better enjoy it since the skeptics feel that this sm
Hello Martyn Drake,
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 12:16:22 GMT your local time,
which was Tuesday, March 21, 2000, 7:16:22 PM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Martyn Drake wrote:
> The unusual aspect of it all was that my archived copy of The Bat! 1.39
> was running just fine under Windows 2000 when I decided
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 15:07:52 -0800, Tom Plunket wrote:
[ ... ]
> I find it somewhat frustrating at times too, but in the end it's
> better than the-MUA-I'd-go-back-to-in-a-second-if-it-did-multiple-
> email-accounts (aka Agent)'s handling where unquoted text ALWAYS
> wraps to the specified line
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 20:38:11 +, John Rainer wrote:
> I've been using The Bat now for several weeks and been generally
> very pleased with it. The only feature that I find a bit frustrating
> compared to other mail clients that I've used is word wrapping.
> Apart from pasted material not wrapp
JR> I've been using The Bat now for several weeks and been generally very
JR> pleased with it. The only feature that I find a bit frustrating
JR> compared to other mail clients that I've used is word wrapping.
I find it somewhat frustrating at times too, but in the end it's
better than the-MUA-I
Hello!
Allie Martin wrote at 3/21/2000, 5:28 PM, pages and pages:
AM> I use two cookie files, ie, TB!'s own cookie file and a remote
AM> cookie file. I therefore use cookies from both by inserting either
AM> '%COOKIE' or '%COOKIE="\"' in my templates.
I have a related, and easier-to-und
I've been using The Bat now for several weeks and been generally very
pleased with it. The only feature that I find a bit frustrating
compared to other mail clients that I've used is word wrapping. Apart
from pasted material not wrapping (which is not unusual in other
programs, admittedly) the mai
Hi there!
On 20 Mar 00, at 23:51, Thomas Fernandez wrote
about "Re: Multiple aliases":
> >> I think this would not only overcomplicate usage - as well as
> >> programme development, thus inviting bugs - but also bloat the thing.
>
> AVK> I don't think so.
>
> IMHO this would mean that I ha
Hi Chris,
On 21 March 2000 at 10:47:59 GMT -0500 (which was 15:47 where I
live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote and made these points:
> I'm new so please be kind :-)
> Could someone direct me to some "how-to's" on setting up filters? The
> Bat! is very much different than any other mailer I've used
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 11:28:54 -0500, Allie Martin wrote:
> I've come to realize that the %ISSIGNATURE macro is the
> problem. The quick template that I use that uses cookies from both
> files has the %ISSIGNATURE macro. Upon deleting this macro, the
> problem disappeared. Upon, reintroduc
Reply begun at:
Tuesday, March 21, 2000 11:31:08 AM
I'd be more than content to use a group, but the entire list appears
in the main address book listing whenever I need to select an address
therefrom!
Best regards,
Curt
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 18:56:54 +0400, Oleg Zalyalov wrote:
Oleg> Hello, th
Hi,
I'm using The Bat! Version 1.42 Beta/4
Serial Number CCA4F9B8
under Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195
and would like to report a bug
The bug description:
I use two cookie files, ie, TB!'s own cookie file and a remote
cookie file. I therefore use cookies from both by inserting eit
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 10:47:59 -0500, Chris VanHonk wrote:
> I'm new so please be kind :-)
We'll try our very best. ;-b
> Could someone direct me to some "how-to's" on setting up filters?
> The Bat! is very much different than any other mailer I've used. It
> will take some getting used t
Hi All,
I'm new so please be kind :-)
Could someone direct me to some "how-to's" on setting up filters? The
Bat! is very much different than any other mailer I've used. It will
take some getting used to.
--
God bless,
Chris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<>
"I have nothing
Hello, the Bat! list recipients,
Tuesday, March 21, 2000, Curt wrote to [EMAIL PROTECTED] about
One Mystery:
C> When I set up filtering and want to add the sender's email address to
C> an address book (within Actions), I am presented with ONLY the Main
C> Address Book's Group selection.
Cannot c
Marck, dia duit!
On 21/03/2000 you may or may not have meant to post the following to Thomas:
Unbleiveable. This is still persisting. Whether you are a moderator or not, I
cannot shut up and say nothing after your posting:
> Thomas is quite right in what he says. An "alias" is an alternate name
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 12:16:22 , Martyn Drake wrote:
> The unusual aspect of it all was that my archived copy of The Bat! 1.39
> was running just fine under Windows 2000 when I decided to start from
> scratch and import all of my old Outlook stuff over which is slightly
> more up-to-date than what
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 06:55:52 -0500, Allie Martin wrote:
> I found NT4 and now Win2k opinions to be quite polar in
> quality. :) There are those having serious problems and hitting their
> heads with frying pans , and there are those having little or no
> problems at all. I've been expose
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 09:08:37 +0700, tracer wrote:
>> Ah those upgrade installations that 'seem' to be OK. TB!
>> problems may just be the beginning. A fresh install all the time
>> for me. I have had no problems whatsoever with TB!. Funny, it's the
>> same installation of TB! that I am us
Hi Thomas,
On 21 March 2000 at 12:24:38 GMT +0800 (which was 04:24 where I
live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote and made these points:
>>> Thomas is correct I believe. An alias is an"other" name for the
>>> same thing. It is not the primary name of the thing. Hence the
>>> definition, "other." Prett
Hi Leif,
On 21 March 2000 at 12:19:41 GMT +0900 (which was 03:19 where I
live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote and made these points:
> He's about to cause a vicious mail loop when we stick him on
> read-only status. We'll see how long his mail server can take it.
> On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 at 01
24 matches
Mail list logo
