It is said that Chris concocted the following rebuttal : '
C> Feature request?
Yes. Indeed! I'll try it. Although, after the last one I did; and
then reading several comments about the lack of action ON Feature
Request, it might be like p*ing in the wind.
--
Regards,
Robert D.
:flag-us-ky:
___
Robert D. @ 5/19/2006 6:48:50 AM
"Filter on Message Size"
> Anyway, lacking the ability in TB!, I unsubscribed from the
> otherwise enjoyable list.
Feature request?
--
Chris
Quoting when replying to this message is good for you and me.
Using The Bat! v3.80.03 on Windows X
Thomas Fernandez waved a wand then said : '
T> I use "Receive headers only if message size is greater than 100KB"
T> in Account / Properties / Mail Management
Hi ...
I suppose, that I should have made a reference to that option in my
first post. You see, I already have t
Hello Robert,
On Thu, 18 May 2006 18:05:58 -0400 GMT (19/05/2006, 05:05 +0700 GMT),
Robert D. wrote:
RD> In fact, personally, it makes more sense to use it BEFORE one has to
RD> download ten 512mb Fido pictures not after the fact. What is the
RD> pragmatic use of filtering on message
Recently, Roelof Otten squawked : '
R> In that case you're out of luck.
Pity that. It seems to me that since they knew how to read the message
size and incorporated that in other Sorting Office Filters, that they
could have just as easily placed the same Size filter in the selec
Hallo Robert,
On Thu, 18 May 2006 07:13:59 -0400GMT (18-5-2006, 13:13 +0200, where I
live), you wrote:
R>> The sorting office has a 'message size' condition, did you try
R>> that?
RD> However, that choice never appears when constructing a filter within
RD> the pseu
It is said that Robert D. concocted the following rebuttal : '
R> Rather a considerable downsized list of selections occupies the
R> pop-up as seen in the jpeg hopefully attached to this reply
which I see did not
so look here at it:
http://www.denstarfarm.us/Public/bats.jpg
--
Regards,
Robert
It is said that Roelof Otten concocted the following rebuttal : '
R> The sorting office has a 'message size' condition, did you try
R> that?
Yes it does.
However, that choice never appears when constructing a filter within
the pseudo-account called 'Selective Downlo
Hallo Robert,
On Wed, 17 May 2006 21:22:19 -0400GMT (18-5-2006, 3:22 +0200, where I
live), you wrote:
RD> Does anyone know of a way to filter inbound messages based on the size
RD> of the message?
The sorting office has a 'message size' condition, did you try that?
--
Groetj
Does anyone know of a way to filter inbound messages based on the size
of the message?
--
Regards,
Robert D.
:flag-us-ky:
_
The Bat! Version: 3.80.06
Windows ME
FireFox
Current version is 3.80.06 | 'Using TBUDL' informat
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 09:32:06 -0400, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 12:46:18 +0200 GMT, Cory wrote:
>
>> I tested this by installing v2.04.07and onward on the mentioned PC
>> where 2.02.03CE initially did show the message size: neither version
&
iltraq v2.5.1.1580 - while my TB
>C> (v2.10.01, also on WinXP SP1) doesn't.
>
>How about the current TB version?
I tested this by installing v2.04.07and onward on the mentioned PC
where 2.02.03CE initially did show the message size: neither version
shows the message size.
Very, v
Hello Cory,
On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 13:53:31 +0200 GMT (09/07/2004, 18:53 +0700 GMT),
Cory wrote:
C> To continue on this topic, I just found out that the Mail Dispatcher
C> of TB 2.02.3 CE (on my colleague's WinXP SP1) *does* show the message
C> sizes when using a POP3 account on Mailtraq v2.5.1.1580
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 12:29:19 +0200, Roelof Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> When using the Mail Dispatcher to view my mailbox, I'm seeing all
> messages listed as size 0.
> During a telnet session to my server, it's listing the message size
> in bytes when prompt
Hello Cory,
On Mon, 03 May 2004 12:22:07 +0200 GMT (03/05/2004, 17:22 +0700 GMT),
Cory wrote:
C> in the dispatcher). Both servers show the message size upon entering
C> command TOP 1 0, but Mailtraq does not add the string "octets" as in
C> "+OK 6205 octets" - coul
upport
list, I assume ;)
I just performed a quick telnet test against a public server runnig
Cubic Circle (showing sizes in the dispatcher) and Mailtraq
Professional 2.5.1.1580 (one of the latest builds, not showing sizes
in the dispatcher). Both servers show the message size upon entering
comman
Hello Roelof,
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 12:29:19 +0200 GMT (28/04/2004, 17:29 +0700 GMT),
Roelof Otten wrote:
RO> When using the Mail Dispatcher to view my mailbox, I'm seeing all
RO> messages listed as size 0.
RO> Is this a known issue?
No, I use the mail dispatcher often and the size is shown
Hallo TBUDL,
When using the Mail Dispatcher to view my mailbox, I'm seeing all
messages listed as size 0.
During a telnet session to my server, it's listing the message size
in bytes when prompted with the same commands as TB is using.
Is this a known issue?
For both TB an
Hi Wolfgang :)
[snip]
WK> Interesting to hear. I have the same problem when using the
WK> companies exchange server. What server do you use?
I'm using our ISP server at escape.com. I've tried it on several
email servers, and they all seem to be the same. I wrote a program
in V
Hi Wolfgang :)
Wednesday, October 18, 2000, 2:26:12 AM, you wrote:
See part 1
seams that for some reason the email server is timing out after
receiving the end of message command (the period on a line by
itself). I've tried sending that again after the first one, and
still
Hi Martian,
MK> I seem to be having a message
MK> size limit problem. I can send messages less then 1K size, but
MK> not larger (somewhere betweeen 1K and 1.5K). Any ideas why that
MK> might be? I have a registered copy (the $35 version). Messages
MK> larger than 1K seem to send the first par
Hi All,
I seem to be having a message
size limit problem. I can send messages less then 1K size, but
not larger (somewhere betweeen 1K and 1.5K). Any ideas why that
might be? I have a registered copy (the $35 version). Messages
larger than 1K seem to send the first
Hallo Carsten,
On Fri, 7 Jan 2000 16:26:22 +0100 GMT (07.01.2000, 23:26 +0800 GMT),
Carsten Dreesbach wrote:
TF>> Maybe TB has a problem swapping. Are both of you working with 64K RAM?
CD> *LOL* I'm sure you _meant_ 64M, not K, right? Or was I not aware that
CD> TB! ran on the C64? *grin* Sor
Hello Thomas and Bat Buddies,
> Maybe TB has a problem swapping. Are both of you working with 64K RAM?
"Back then" (months ago) when I had received that error message, I did
have 64mb. I just now tested downloading a large attachment, however,
and everything worked fine. My system today is Win98
Hello Thomas,
Friday, January 07, 2000, 3:08:02 PM, you wrote:
TF> Maybe TB has a problem swapping. Are both of you working with 64K RAM?
*LOL* I'm sure you _meant_ 64M, not K, right? Or was I not aware that
TB! ran on the C64? *grin* Sorry, I just had to laugh when I saw that
typo, not tryin
Hallo Jason,
On Fri, 7 Jan 2000 03:22:41 -0800 GMT (07.01.2000, 19:22 +0800 GMT),
Jason Thompson wrote:
>> I'm using Win98 on a Celeron 300 with about 500 MB free on the disk
>> drive, 64 MB RAM...
JT> Well I can't give any specifics (as this was some time ago), but TB has
JT> shown me the same
Hello Derek and Bat Buddies,
> I'm using Win98 on a Celeron 300 with about 500 MB free on the disk
> drive, 64 MB RAM...
Well I can't give any specifics (as this was some time ago), but TB has
shown me the same behavior Derek is describing. The message had an MP3
(perhaps about 7mb..a bit on the
Hello Syafril,
Well, I just tried it now... sending a 7.7MB File to myself...TB!
ended up hanging my whole system.
I'm using Win98 on a Celeron 300 with about 500 MB free on the disk
drive, 64 MB RAM...
Derek
Written in response to your letter of Thursday, January 06, 2000, 10:52:42 PM:
SH>
Hello Derek Cedillo,
On Thu, 6 Jan 2000 at 22:35:45 GMT -0500 [Friday, January 07, 2000
10:35 GMT +0700], you told to the list:
DC> I sent myself a couple of large messages yesterday from work...one
DC> a 1.8 MB file, and the other a 7.8 MB file (Don't worry, I have
DC> ADSL ;)
DC> In a
Hello TBUDL,
I sent myself a couple of large messages yesterday from work...one a
1.8 MB file, and the other a 7.8 MB file (Don't worry, I have ADSL ;)
In anycase, the 1.8MB file downloaded okay...the 7.8MB file would
crash TB with an out of memory error. I tried this 5 times, and got
the same e
Hello, the Bat! list recipients,
Saturday, November 27, 1999, Sashka wrote to Ali Martin about
Message size indicators:
AM>> I assume that the number followed by 'b' in the right upper corner of
AM>> the message headers display bar is the message size. What makes it
Hello Ali,
Friday, November 26, 1999, 9:02:12 PM, you wrote:
AM> I assume that the number followed by 'b' in the right upper corner of
AM> the message headers display bar is the message size. What makes it
AM> differ from the message sizes shown in the message list?
IM
Hi all,
I assume that the number followed by 'b' in the right upper corner of
the message headers display bar is the message size. What makes it
differ from the message sizes shown in the message list?
--
* Ali Martin mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** Plagiarism
33 matches
Mail list logo
