Hello Dave,
On Wednesday, March 27, 2002 at 17:39:28 -0500, Dave Goodman [DG]
wrote concerning 'Clarification requested on list reply headers':
...
I've seen Marck's warnings about using folder templates, along with
comments from several others. What I have not seen is an explanation
why
BATTERS,
Geez people! Aren't we paying attention anymore ???
When i cross a green light i still keep looking around me if
any traffic is there.
When you write email check and maybe double check what you are doing
if your mails are sensitive. Heck, never use email for sensitive subjects i
might
Thursday, March 28, 2002, 12:15:54 PM, David van Zuijlekom wrote:
This is a quote from Marck a few months ago (a very good explanation
why folder templates are dangerous):
---
I'm guilty of this. However, I have fifty-odd folders, most of which
I've set with custom properties and templates.
Hello David,
On Thursday, March 28, 2002, at 04:15:54 AM -0700, you wrote
the following in regards to Why folder templates are dangerous (was Re: Clarification
requested on list reply headers):
I've seen Marck's warnings about using folder templates, along with
comments from several others
Hello William,
On Thursday, March 28, 2002, at 12:26:53 PM -0700, you wrote
the following in regards to Why folder templates are dangerous (was Re: Clarification
requested on list reply headers):
NA she
She?
Absolutely! Something as refined yet temperamental as The Bat must be
given
Hello Nick
Thank you for your email dated Thursday, March 28, 2002, 8:14:45 PM, in which you
wrote:
NA she
She?
--
Regards
William
PGP spoken here - email me for my Public Key
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flying with The Bat! 1.60
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 26 Mar 2002 21:47:13 -0500, Etm [E] wrote these comments:
...
E I have noticed the problem. My reply to all placed you in To
E position, TBUDL in CC position (which this mailing list will *not*
E accept), and so I will alter the addresses to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hail Dierk
On 27 March 2002 at 08:54:24 +0100 (which was 07:54 where I live) Dierk
Haasis wrote and made these points
As to whether or not it messes up replying to these old-school lists,
I've always found that a carefully crafted set of folder
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Dierk,
@27 March 2002, 08:54:24 +0100 (07:54 UK time) Dierk Haasis wrote in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
As to whether or not it messes up replying to these old-school
lists, I've always found that a carefully crafted set of folder
templates gets
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Chris,
@27 March 2002, 04:18:54 +0100 (03:18 UK time) Chris Lilley wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
my question is, is this configurable?
No, it's not. Well, not in an easy switch, but I reckon this can be
handled by using a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi ETM,
@27 March 2002, 21:47:13 -0500 (02:47 UK time) ETM wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have noticed the problem. My reply to all placed you in To
position, TBUDL in CC position (which this mailing list will *not*
On Wednesday, March 27, 2002, 11:22:39 AM, Chris Lilley wrote:
I have since found that this issue affects all Yahoogroups (ex
e-groups, onelist, etc) lists. So this is a widespread problem and
not adequately categorized by the mildly derogatory 'old-school
lists' which makes them sound like
Wednesday, March 27, 2002, 4:00:54 PM, Dwight wrote:
On Wednesday, March 27, 2002, 11:22:39 AM, Chris Lilley wrote:
I guess I'm lost on this one, but I'm on several yahoo groups,
and am probably over active on several, and I've never had any
problems with the way that replying works.
I
Chris Lilley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DH Marck, folder templates? From you?
I have since found that this issue affects all Yahoogroups (ex
e-groups, onelist, etc) lists. So this is a widespread problem ...
I've seen Marck's warnings about using folder templates, along with
comments from
Hello tbudl,
I have noticed a change in behavior since moving to 1.60 from 1.53
This affects replying to lists in absence of Reply-to headers.
Munging Reply-to headers is considered bad practice:
http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html
Which is summarized as
Some
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Chris,
@26 March 2002, 18:34:09 +0100 (17:34 UK time) Chris Lilley wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have noticed a change in behavior since moving to 1.60 from 1.53
This affects replying to lists in absence of Reply-to
I have noticed the problem. My reply to all placed you in To
position, TBUDL in CC position (which this mailing list will *not*
accept), and so I will alter the addresses to send. I was
embarrassed recently to find a private reply post with Hugs hit
a mailing list. I have paid careful
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Chris,
@26 March 2002, 18:34:09 +0100 (17:34 UK time) Chris Lilley wrote in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just to clarify one more thing...
In 1.60, reply still works the same and reply to all replies to
From, Cc *and Sender*
On Wednesday, March 27, 2002, 12:39:07 AM, Marck wrote:
MDP -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
MDP Hash: SHA1
MDP Hi Chris,
MDP @26 March 2002, 18:34:09 +0100 (17:34 UK time) Chris Lilley wrote in
MDP [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have noticed a change in behavior since moving
On Wednesday, March 27, 2002, 3:39:25 AM, Marck wrote:
MDP -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
MDP Hash: SHA1
MDP Hi Chris,
MDP @26 March 2002, 18:34:09 +0100 (17:34 UK time) Chris Lilley wrote in
MDP [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
MDP Just to clarify one more thing...
In 1.60,
20 matches
Mail list logo
