Re: Deleting filter doesn't work - Conclusions
Rene Merz said: And how do you explain the fact, that you can choose the condition for a (non-manually started filter!): Date is older than X days? I already explained that Date is not the same as age since recieved date, but rather more likely age since sent date. See the difference? My results indicate it's not likely to be received date at least. This makes very much sense as a message just arriving doesn't have a received date yet and at least not older than today. So the condition Date is older than 3 days for example would do the set action only to messages that was sent more than 3 days ago. Which makes sense to me as being a useful, albeit uncommon perhaps, setting. This filter-condition doesn't make sense at all! It could say more clearly sent date, assuming this is the case. But if you forget for a minute about already received messages and think about incoming ones, I think you can find it actually does make sense. I tested this filter functionality and got results. What's the problem? If you repeat my test of this filter condition as described, do you actually get a different result? In addition, as I think I already have mentioned, all the functionality you seek in this filter of yours could very well be achieved with one existing script Delete Aged Messages v1.2, or if there's a later version. Don't you want to use this or similar scripts for some reason? I haven't used it for a long time, but it got the job done when I needed it. I'm not sure where it is today, but google is your friend. Mikael Technoids: PM 5.6.1 build 4499 sv / SpamSieve 2.6.6 sv | OS X 10.4.8 | Powerbook G4/400 | 1GB / 80GB
Re: Deleting filter doesn't work - Conclusions
Rick Lecoat sa såhär: e (eg. Date received is before Jan 1, 2020), Select All, and then apply the 'messages over x age' filter manually. Good advice, Rick, but why do you think Date is the same as received date in this context? I rather weigh over to Date meaning the sent date as this makes more sense to me. I did a new test to verify this, First I made a test folder then a new filter: Folder is test folder Date is older than x days Execute if all conditions are met -Display alert sender namesubject The alert is to identify the affected message. My test messages has date sent 2007-12-15 and date saved as 2007-12-23. I'm not sure why it's called received date in the PowerMail search dialog, but I have no reason to think this is not the same. Today, 2008-01-25, the date saved is 33 days ago and date sent is 41 days ago, no? So with my test message in my test folder I find that with 35 days the filter action is executed and with 41 days it is executed. So far so good. Conclusion, it's not the date saved that date is older than is regarding. Final test with value 42 days gives a non executing action which leads to to the conclusion again that it's the date sent that date is older than is regarding. I really think it should say date sent is older than, but there you go. All of this is of course a separate issue to the problem with non- manually feeding a filter a group of messages. If some more people could repeat the test with their messages, this would be very nice. Mikael Technoids: PM 5.6.1 build 4499 sv / SpamSieve 2.6.6 sv | OS X 10.4.8 | Powerbook G4/400 | 1GB / 80GB
Re: Deleting filter doesn't work - Conclusions
Um, to be honest, I wasn't really making a distinction between received and sent dates when I posted that. I was simply thinking of a 'date' and because I tend to sort my mail via date received rather than date sent (too many of my correspondents have dates wrongly set on their computers -- or maybe its their mail servers) I typed Date Received in my reply to Rene. If the filter criteria 'Is Older than' refers to date sent rather than date received then that is good to know and thanks for determining that. However, for the sake of my (simplistic) example, where I was envisaging removal of messages over, say, 3 years old, the distinction is perhaps unnecessary. Rick -- G5 2GHz x2 :: 2GB RAM :: 10.4.11 :: PM 5.5.2 :: 3 pane mode On 25 Jan 2008, at 12:00, MB wrote: Good advice, Rick, but why do you think Date is the same as received date in this context?
Re: Deleting filter doesn't work - Conclusions
Rick Lecoat said: However, for the sake of my (simplistic) example, where I was envisaging removal of messages over, say, 3 years old, the distinction is perhaps unnecessary. It may be, yes, depending on the particular users intentions.
Re: Deleting filter doesn't work - Conclusions
MB wrote: These results also mean that most likely my earlier postulated theory is true. Which was: that all filter conditions only apply to messages that are incoming from the current connection or that have been selected with the filters performed from the Mail menu and not for messages that have been fetched already. And how do you explain the fact, that you can choose the condition for a (non-manually started filter!): Date is older than X days? This filter-condition doesn't make sense at all!
Re: Deleting filter doesn't work - Conclusions
Rene; Perhaps the filter condition is there precisely FOR manually activated filters. I know that in my own PM set up I have a bunch of filters down at the bottom of the filter list that are designed for manual use, not automated. If I wanted to move all of my mail over a certain date to a specific folder, for instance, I could perform a search that would list every message in my database (eg. Date received is before Jan 1, 2020), Select All, and then apply the 'messages over x age' filter manually. And yes, I realise that I could locate all those age-specific messages via the initial Search, but that was only a simple example; filters allow for much more sophisticated criteria than Search does, and I could therefore move just those messages that were (eg.) over a certain age AND from senders within a certain address book group AND have attachments over a certain size. BTW, To make some filters manual-only just make a 'stop point' filter (condition: Always; action: stop applying filters to this message), and put it at the bottom of your filter list. Then put all your manual-activation-only filters *below* this stop point. Rick -- G5 2GHz x2 :: 2GB RAM :: 10.4.11 :: PM 5.5.2 :: 3 pane mode On 24 Jan 2008, at 10:14, Rene Merz wrote: And how do you explain the fact, that you can choose the condition for a (non-manually started filter!): Date is older than X days? This filter-condition doesn't make sense at all!
Re: Deleting filter doesn't work - Conclusions
I said earlier: Actually, on the next connection it did. I'm not sure yet on what the difference was. And it's better to test this with a sound as having the dialog popup was a real nuisance. Well, as it were I forgot I added Folder is [in box] to older than [1] days and I had set if any condition is met. So it was because the incoming was going to the inbox the action was triggered. I changed it to all conditions instead. So results so far with sound playing as the action are with these conditions and newly sent messages: Folder is [in box] Sound play = Works! and Folder is [in box] older than [0] days Sound play =Works! Folder is [in box] older than [1] days Sound doesn't play =Works! These results also mean that most likely my earlier postulated theory that all filter conditions only apply to messages that are incoming from the current connection or that have been selected and with the filters performed from the Mail menu and not for messages that have been fetched already. Mikael Technoids: PM 5.6.1 build 4499 sv / SpamSieve 2.6.5 sv | OS X 10.4.8 | Powerbook G4/400 | 1GB / 80GB
Re: Deleting filter doesn't work - Conclusions
MB should really have said: These results also mean that most likely my earlier postulated theory is true. Which was: that all filter conditions only apply to messages that are incoming from the current connection or that have been selected with the filters performed from the Mail menu and not for messages that have been fetched already.
