Re: A 'Kill dupes' problem
Hello Tony Boom & everyone else 08-Nov-2004 13:58, you wrote: MO>> Oh, I remember the old Amiga clients Spot and Thor :-) The first a MO>> fidonet client, the latter intended for both fidonet and email. > Amiga on the web eh? Bet that was fast :) Faster than yo momma! :-) You know, its applications like TheBat that makes it easier for us Amiga geeks to dwell on Windows... hehe -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) using v3.0.2.5 on Windows XP Pro Service Pack 2 The only thing that stops God from sending another flood is that the first one was useless. -- Chamfort Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: A 'Kill dupes' problem
Hello Marcus, A reminder of what Marcus Ohlström typed on: 08 November 2004 at 12:54:00 GMT +0100 MO> Oh, I remember the old Amiga clients Spot and Thor :-) The first a MO> fidonet client, the latter intended for both fidonet and email. Amiga on the web eh? Bet that was fast :) I still got a 64 in the shed somewhere, never used it for email though. -- Best regards,Tony. _ Message composed on 08/11/2004 at 12:57 UTC 2004 - AWB Using The Bat! v3.0.2.5 on Windows XP 5. 1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: A 'Kill dupes' problem
On Monday, November 8, 2004, 11:07, Tony Boom wrote: > Out of all the clients I've bought, and I have a few, The Bat is > the only one that has the option to prevent accidental deletion. > Obviously we are now going to be flooded with dozens of posts > naming others that have the option :) Oh, I remember the old Amiga clients Spot and Thor :-) The first a fidonet client, the latter intended for both fidonet and email. Thor (or was it Spot?) had an extra feature called "Super Unread" which I used quite a lot. A message marked as "Super Unread" could not be marked unread other then by manually deselecting the "Super Unread" status. Not only protecting from deletion, but also from marking read. Running TB!, I use flagging for the same purpose, in addition with a VF showing me all flagged messages. Those were the days... -- Regards, Marcus Ohlström Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 PGP Public Key at http://www.canit.se/~marcus/pgp.asc Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: A 'Kill dupes' problem
Hello Roger, A reminder of what Roger Phillips typed on: 08 November 2004 at 04:55:59 GMT +0100 RP> Given my comments here, can you give me a good and sensible reason why RP> anybody would want to keep duplicates of a message within the same RP> folder? Woa, Woa Woa, ang on a mo. I'm not talking anything about duplicates, all I'm doing is opposing the suggestion to do away with the option to park messages so they can't be deleted. I can't give you any reason why anyone would want duplicate messages, I can and have given you plenty of reasons why people would want to "P"rotect a message from accidental deletion. Out of all the clients I've bought, and I have a few, The Bat is the only one that has the option to prevent accidental deletion. Obviously we are now going to be flooded with dozens of posts naming others that have the option :) -- Best regards,Tony. _ Message composed on 08/11/2004 at 09:56 UTC 2004 - AWB Using The Bat! v3.0.2.5 on Windows XP 5. 1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: A 'Kill dupes' problem
Hello Tony, Sunday, November 7, 2004, 4:17:31 PM, among other things, you wrote: TB> Occasionally I buy software off the web, The Bat, Time & Chaos, Acronis, TB> MailwasherPro, NOD32 and Kerio to name a few. They send me an email with TB> all my registration details, I put it in an archive folder, Park it and TB> don't have to worry about accidentally deleting it. TB> I have deliberately made multiple duplicates of all of these both on CD, SD TB> and USB memory sticks just in case... It's invariably TB! I look to first TB> should I need them. Yes, but these 'duplicates' are all stored in different media or different folders. The TB 'Kill dupes' feature only deals with duplicates which occur within a single folder. It does NOT compare the contents of a folder with the contents of any other folder. As proof of this in my own setup let me explain part of it: ALL of my outgoing mail is copied to the 'Sent mail' folder, some of the messages are also copied to one or more folders according to the Addressee, the Subject, or some other identifying feature. Routine maintenance which includes 'Remove duplicates' has never removed any of these multiple copies. They are not duplicates in the sense which 'Kill dupes' operates. TB> Unlike a lot of people, I delete most of the mail I receive especially when TB> a thread I'm participating in is finished. I then go on a frenzied deletion TB> spree. But there is the occasional one I want to keep so I park it just in TB> case I get too click happy. I do the same, for the same reasons. But, as I have explained in my other reply to you, TB has created duplicates within a single folder. I'm not certain when this happened but assume it probably occurred during the period when we were all battling to sort out the new filter system and were making numerous tests. Given my comments here, can you give me a good and sensible reason why anybody would want to keep duplicates of a message within the same folder? In response to those who are suggesting that we cannot trust the 'Kill dupes' feature I'd remind them that it is prudent to make a backup before carrying out any cleanup action, in any application. I await your responses with keen anticipation. -- Best regards, Roger Flying with The Bat!, version 3.0.2.4 Rush, and antispam BayesIt! 0.7.4 on Windows ME, version 3000, Build 90 Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: A 'Kill dupes' problem
Hello Tony, Sunday, November 7, 2004, 12:51:01 PM, among other things, you wrote: RP>> Any comments? TB> Yes, the idea of parking a message is to protect it from exactly what your TB> trying to do with it, deleting it! Yes, I AM aware of the reason for parking! I was only asking about deleting DUPLICATES. RP>> If it is, 'as designed', then IMHO it should be changed. TB> Please don't, I use it quite a lot and I like the idea of being able to TB> "Idiot proof" the odd email or two, duplicate or not. OK you've given a good reason for not changing the system. Hence my reason for asking for comments in the first place before taking any untoward action. I too keep all my archival material as 'parked'. But due to some of the strange and unexpected actions of TB I found that I had also accumulated quite a large number of unsolicited parked duplicates! Thanks to everyone who replied so promptly. -- Best regards, Roger Flying with The Bat!, version 3.0.2.4 Rush, and antispam BayesIt! 0.7.4 on Windows ME, version 3000, Build 90 Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: A 'Kill dupes' problem
On Sunday, November 7, 2004, 11:51, Tony Boom wrote: RP>> If it is, 'as designed', then IMHO it should be changed. > Please don't, I use it quite a lot and I like the idea of being able to > "Idiot proof" the odd email or two, duplicate or not. Especially since the kill duplicate procedure has proven not to be 100% reliable. You might remember the discussion about TB! not considering all flags when deciding what is a duplicate and what is not. Imagine one parked copy and one not parked and TB! deciding to kill the wrong copy. I totally agree with Tony, parking should protect a message from any kind of deletion, as far as TB! is able to do it. Do not change this behaviour. -- Regards, Marcus Ohlström Using The Bat! v3.0.1.33 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4 PGP Public Key at http://www.canit.se/~marcus/pgp.asc Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: A 'Kill dupes' problem
Hello Roger, On Sun, 7 Nov 2004 14:36:31 +0200 GMT (07/11/2004, 19:36 +0700 GMT), Roger Phillips wrote: RP> I disagree. If you want to have a duplicate you can make one, but RP> why would you want to STORE one? I wouldn't know, but it would be your decision to store those duplicates, wouldn't it? Why should TB override your decision? -- Cheers, Thomas. "Domino vobiscum." (Latin for: The pizza guy is here.) Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.4 Rush under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: A 'Kill dupes' problem
Hello Tony! On Sunday, November 7, 2004 at 3:17:31 PM you wrote: > I put it in an archive folder, Park it and don't have to worry about > accidentally deleting it. > It's invariably TB! I look to first should I need them. > Unlike a lot of people, I delete most of the mail I receive especially when > a thread I'm participating in is finished. You do it exactly like me. That makes two needing the feature as it is designed ... -- Dierk Haasis :Dierk: Copy 'n' Concept The Bat 3.0.2.5 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Chat info for ICQ, AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Jabber upon request A person who smiles in the face of adversity probably has a scapegoat. (Derek Leveret) Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: A 'Kill dupes' problem
Hello Dierk, A reminder of what Dierk Haasis typed on: 07 November 2004 at 14:58:47 GMT +0100 DH> Tony may be the better one to tell, as he uses this. Occasionally I buy software off the web, The Bat, Time & Chaos, Acronis, MailwasherPro, NOD32 and Kerio to name a few. They send me an email with all my registration details, I put it in an archive folder, Park it and don't have to worry about accidentally deleting it. I have deliberately made multiple duplicates of all of these both on CD, SD and USB memory sticks just in case... It's invariably TB! I look to first should I need them. Unlike a lot of people, I delete most of the mail I receive especially when a thread I'm participating in is finished. I then go on a frenzied deletion spree. But there is the occasional one I want to keep so I park it just in case I get too click happy. -- Best regards,Tony. _ Message composed on 07/11/2004 at 14:02 UTC 2004 - AWB Using The Bat! v3.0.2.5 on Windows XP 5. 1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: A 'Kill dupes' problem
Hello Roger! On Sunday, November 7, 2004 at 1:36:31 PM you wrote: > I disagree. If you want to have a duplicate you can make one, but > why would you want to STORE one? Well, for archival reasons? If ever I intentionally duplicate a message I am quite sure I do want to store it, too. Otherwise I just don't duplicate. Tony may be the better one to tell, as he uses this. -- Dierk Haasis :Dierk: Copy 'n' Concept The Bat 3.0.2.5 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Chat info for ICQ, AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Jabber upon request Only the strong survive. Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: A 'Kill dupes' problem
Hello Roger, A reminder of what Roger Phillips typed on: 07 November 2004 at 09:48:53 GMT +0100 RP> Any comments? Yes, the idea of parking a message is to protect it from exactly what your trying to do with it, deleting it! RP> If it is, 'as designed', then IMHO it should be changed. Please don't, I use it quite a lot and I like the idea of being able to "Idiot proof" the odd email or two, duplicate or not. -- Best regards,Tony. _ Message composed on 07/11/2004 at 10:44 UTC 2004 - AWB Using The Bat! v3.0.2.5 on Windows XP 5. 1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re[2]: A 'Kill dupes' problem
Hello Dierk, Sunday, November 7, 2004, 11:02:51 AM, among other things, you wrote: >> Any comments? DH> I think it is intentional. I also think it is logical: When I want to DH> lock a message (which is what "Park" does), I don't want to have it DH> deleted regardless of a duplicate purge. I disagree. If you want to have a duplicate you can make one, but why would you want to STORE one? -- Best regards, Roger Flying with The Bat!, version 3.0.2.4 Rush, and antispam BayesIt! 0.7.4 on Windows ME, version 3000, Build 90 Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: A 'Kill dupes' problem
Hello Roger! On Sunday, November 7, 2004 at 9:48:59 AM you wrote: > Any comments? I think it is intentional. I also think it is logical: When I want to lock a message (which is what "Park" does), I don't want to have it deleted regardless of a duplicate purge. -- Dierk Haasis :Dierk: Copy 'n' Concept The Bat 3.0.2.5 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Chat info for ICQ, AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Jabber upon request What do you get when you fall in love? A girl with a pin to burst your bubble! Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
A 'Kill dupes' problem
Hi All, I have only recently noticed that the 'Kill duplicates' action ignores any messages that are marked as 'Parked'. My question is, does anyone know if this is intentional or if it is a bug? 9Val? If it is, 'as designed', then IMHO it should be changed. If one wants to remove duplicates then one wants to remove _ALL_ duplicates regardless of what their characteristics may be. Any comments? -- Best regards, Roger Flying with The Bat!, version 3.0.2.4 Rush, and antispam BayesIt! 0.7.4 on Windows ME, version 3000, Build 90 Current beta is 3.0.2.5 Rush | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
