Re: SmartBat new features?
Hello Jim! On Saturday, December 14, 2002 at 12:32:13 AM you wrote: Are there any attempts at documenting this feature (besides the FAQ which has some brief mentions of it)??? And when this new design will do what I think it will - namely incorporating various editors into TB via SmartBat - when will others installed on a system, like TextPad on mine, be supported? -- Dierk Haasis The Bat 1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows XP 5.1 2600Service Pack 1 The most powerful strategy in life is tit-for-tat. None other is as successful. (Derek Leveret) Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Resizeable Quick Templates Window.
Hi TBUDL, I have a minor enhancement request which I want to announce here to see if it is something that other TB! users would find useful or if I'm living in my own little world again. :) I have always found the Quick Templates window (SHIFT-CTRL-Q) to be a bit too small for my liking. It's a fixed sized window (ie: it cannot be resized) and I always have to scroll the templates list both horizontally and vertically to see all the information. All I'd like to do is to be able to resize the master window to a size of my liking. I can do this with the connection centre window and with the message despatcher window so really I imagine it's probably not too tough a thing to alter to make the Quick Templates window resizeable, especially when the template edit window is resizeable too. So, would this change be of interest to anyone else on TBUDL and if so, what is now the best mechanism for me to pass that request on to Stefan/Max/Ritlabs? (I've not paid much attention to this list over the past year due to preoccupation with my work, I'm not sure if things have changed or not.) Best Wishes, Mark -- - Using TheBat! 1.62 Christmas Edition Windows XP 5 1 2600 - Just4Fun - Freestuff, Humour and More! - http://just4fun.ipfox.com/ - Mark R Harding The Integrated Systems Group (Vision) Department of Electronics Electrical Engineering The University of Edinburgh, King's Buildings, Mayfield Road Edinburgh. EH9 3JL. Scotland. U.K. Phone: +44 (0)131 650 5662 Fax:+44 (0)131 650 6554 Email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] URL:http://www.ee.ed.ac.uk/~mrh/ - Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: SmartBat new features?
Hello Dierk, On Saturday, December 14, 2002 at 10:08:04 AM you [DH] wrote (at least in part): Are there any attempts at documenting this feature (besides the FAQ which has some brief mentions of it)??? DH And when this new design will do what I think it will - namely DH incorporating various editors into TB via SmartBat I guess it's not for integrating different editors, but more for being able to switch between Editor and e.g. Calendar and whatever should come with PIM functionality which is announced. -- Regards Peter Palmreuther (The Bat! v1.62 Beta/17 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1) He who fished in another man's well often catches crab. Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: SmartBat new features?
Hello Peter! On Saturday, December 14, 2002 at 11:28:39 AM you wrote: I guess it's not for integrating different editors, but more for being able to switch between Editor and e.g. Calendar and whatever should come with PIM functionality which is announced. Then I want at least the editor of my choice being in SmartBat instead of Notepad. -- Dierk Haasis The Bat 1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows XP 5.1 2600Service Pack 1 Mitfreude, nicht Mitleiden macht den Freund. (Friedrich Nietzsche) Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Simon, Saturday, December 14, 2002, 2:43:25 AM, you wrote (possibly edited): MR If I choose Internal Implementation, your S/MIME signatures verify as MR valid. If, however, I choose the Microsoft CryptoAPI implementation MR of S/MIME, your very same message returns a verification of invalid. As I have said, not for me. Excuse for interjecting here, not having read this thread from the beginning. I would like to mention that my experience is the same as Melissa's regarding the above point. Surely, inconsistent results detract a lot from the reliability of S/MIME as a security system. - -- Best regards, Costasmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 6.5.8ckt http://www.ipgpp.com/ iQA/AwUBPfrpGZxi4I+G4ZmXEQLx+ACg3YnPGA4x8KdCqJeP8xwd5dV0iksAoITe YJwuW0t1sM1EpBG7V7E3XzAq =Exly -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Making PGP work
Dear Melissa, Friday, December 13, 2002, 7:29:54 PM, you wrote: MR With PGP, all you need to do is highlight only the key block that is MR within the clear signed message, click Ctrl+C, then go to PGPtray, MR and choose Clipboard/Decrypt Verify. You are right that I was working on your public key, I hope you don't mind! I have nothing of a confidential nature to communicate to you but was rather using your PGP setup as a way of getting my own going half as efficiently as yours! The problem with learning about and using PGP is that practically no one that I actually need to communicate securely with has it which means that it is very difficult to become familiar with it. I followed your advice for which I thank you and that all works fine. What I was actually attempting to do though was to use the Bat PGP plugin rather than PGP itself. In other words I was trying to do what Simon Blake suggested in his answer to my post (thank you Simon). His advice was to: choose Tools/ OpenPGP/OpenPGP Decrypt and up pops the PGP Log window and minimizes to the tray as the key import window pops up displaying the Melissa's keys to import. If I do this I get to the point where the PGP log window pops up and that is where the process stops. I am not sure why. Simon asks what version of PGP I have which I think is 6.5. Is that something to do with this? Any ideas? -- Regards, Clive __ Clive Scott PO Box 3250 St John's Antigua West Indies [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Resizeable Quick Templates Window.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Mark R Harding [MRH] wrote:'
MRH All I'd like to do is to be able to resize the master window to
MRH a size of my liking. I can do this with the connection centre
MRH window and with the message despatcher window so really I
MRH imagine it's probably not too tough a thing to alter to make
MRH the Quick Templates window resizeable, especially when the
MRH template edit window is resizeable too.
Agreed. I've been wanting this as well.
MRH So, would this change be of interest to anyone else on TBUDL
MRH and if so, what is now the best mechanism for me to pass that
MRH request on to Stefan/Max/Ritlabs? (I've not paid much attention
MRH to this list over the past year due to preoccupation with my
MRH work, I'm not sure if things have changed or not.)
Make a feature request.
Go via the TBUDL info URL in the list footer of all messages from
this list.
--
-=] Allie C Martin [=- {List Moderator}
MUA: TB! v1.62 Christmas Edition ___ OS: WinXP Pro (SP1)
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Costas, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:17:03 +0200 your time, you said: MR If I choose Internal Implementation, your S/MIME signatures verify as MR valid. If, however, I choose the Microsoft CryptoAPI implementation MR of S/MIME, your very same message returns a verification of invalid. As I have said, not for me. CP Excuse for interjecting here, not having read this thread from the CP beginning. The beginning is usually a good place to start :) CP I would like to mention that my experience is the same as Melissa's CP regarding the above point. Surely, inconsistent results detract a lot CP from the reliability of S/MIME as a security system. In the nicest possible way, and without meaning to be provocative at all, if you'd read the whole thread you may have followed my reasoning for replying as I did...I am not claiming that my views are any better than Melissa's. They are just my views of course, and nothing more. In reply to you I would say that I don't see S/MIME as being any more inconsistent than PGP, from my experience of both. And when we are talking generally like this, and the reference for our bias seems to be new users to The Bat! (TBUDL) and new users of S/MIME, I don't see how there can be fair criticism. If on the other hand S/MIME can be shown to suffer from this inconsistency in most S/MIME compliant applications then I would probably concede. However, as far as I am aware S/MIME is taken up because of it's simplicity and ease, and it's availability, and the fact that it's use doesn't require third party software. I don't see any evidence beyond this small, isolated discussion, indicating that S/MIME is renowned for being less reliable than PGP, and nor do I believe that a few people having problems with/not understanding how to use certificates in a small user group is fair evidence of S/MIME's unreliability. - From reading various pgp related news groups regularly I am aware of many of the problems that pgp users have setting up and using PGP... problems with initial compatibility/understanding at the user end. They are no different to S/MIME users in that respect. In many respects S/MIME has an advantage, even if I much personally prefer PGP. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #715. Sea World Squirmy ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfs6zMtub/5cfolmEQJjYACdEY/rLQAgD/LFLT0ILX5e7CFu9LIAoJTr BB1pKJgLZJEmLAC0kTvUj1Rr =1Kwt -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Making PGP work
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Clive, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 08:37:58 -0500 your time, you said: CGS If I do this I get to the point where the PGP log window pops up and CGS that is where the process stops. I am not sure why. Simon asks what CGS version of PGP I have which I think is 6.5. Is that something to do CGS with this? Any ideas? I have been trying everything to replicate this Clive. I am using Imad's build 6.58 build 9 beta 03 with TB! and can't get the import keys window *not* to show. I've changed some settings in PGP options that I thought may cause this but it doesn't make any difference, it still works! The only thing I can think of is you have selected TB!'s internal implementation of PGP rather than the PGP plugin under Tools / OpenPGP / Choose OpenPGP version. That would display only the log window. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #2964. Saw Red Squirm Loy ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfs9S8tub/5cfolmEQKMYACfUZrWFyIypSIr2S4kVoPAin7ewX4An0hr Yp4sdwIk/Uu3nM3+lBo0y/h4 =X7kh -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: multi user, only one allowed
Hello Allie, On Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:14:29 -0500 GMT (14/12/02, 08:14 +0700 GMT), Allie C Martin wrote: KJD But...i do not want both users to be able to edit/reply etc. KJD the same mail, because this way, one incoming mail can be KJD answered twice, both the users do not see that they both are KJD replying the mail, until it is in the out or set box. Different users replying to the same message concurrently cannot be prevented. But a message that has been replied to will have this little arrow on the envelope. The next user accessing the mail base should see it. -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. Unsere Autos prallten genau in dem Augenblick zusammen, als sie sich begegneten. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.62 Christmas Edition under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
Hello Mike, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 03:26:58 + GMT (14/12/02, 10:26 +0700 GMT), Mike Alexander wrote: Outpost lets you set up permissions for each separate program, So does Sygate. I was surprised when I noticed that if you allow an application to use one port, by default all ports are available to that app. I didn't like that a bit. Why Victor gets 30 message for one application, I don't know. I only got one or two per app (for example, with TB, the pop port and the smtp port at remote server, which I allowed), save them, and that's it. I think the point with Kerio is that you have to save the settings, otherwise it will forget them (of course). -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. For those of you who have children and don't know it, we have a nursery downstairs. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.62 Christmas Edition under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re:SmartBat new features?
Peter, At 5:28 AM on Saturday, December 14, 2002 you [PP] wrote the following about 'SmartBat new features?': PP [...] I guess it's not for integrating PP different editors, but more for being PP able to switch between Editor and e.g. PP Calendar and whatever should come with PP PIM functionality which is announced. PP [/...] Sorry, I must have missed this. There was an announced PIM functionality for TB! ? Can you point me to it or was it to the German list? TIA -- Jan Rifkinson Ridgefield, CT USA TB! V1.62 Christmas Edition/W2K_SP3 ICQ 41116329 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Backing up folders
Can someone give me some advice about backing up folders. I've tried going thru the Tools-Backup but I aborted out of it since it looks like it is going to backup everything. I just want to archive a few folders containing old messages I might not need to reference and in this way free up some disk space. Is there any option for selective backup? Is it safe to backup the corresponding Windows folders or do I run the risk of not being able to view the messages again? -- Best regards, Lawrence mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Backing up folders
Hello Lawrence, On Saturday, 14. December 2002 at 10:05:59 [GMT -0600] you wrote: Can someone give me some advice about backing up folders. Use the Freeware program Backup TheBat. You can safe/backup folders, particular emails and so on. Later you can also import that backups again with TB: http://www.thebat.macasoft.hu/letoltes_backupthebat_e.html -- Ciao Thomas Mailer: The Bat!1.62 Christmas Edition | Windows XP PGP: 6.58 ckt Build 8 - Key 0xBB9237A9 ICQ: 121117424 (hardly ever online) HP: http://www.thebat.int.tc/ Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
On Saturday, December 14, 2002, 2:06:04 PM, Simon Blake wrote: In many respects S/MIME has an advantage, even if I much personally prefer PGP. One considerable disadvantage is the size overhead of S/MIME messages - the signing process seems to add 6k onto the message size, and whilst this might be worthwhile for business communications, where the identity of the individual is important, it does not appear to be worthwhile on TBUDL. At least PGP only adds 1k or so to the message size. I'll leave it to someone else to draw the inevitable conclusion of this... :-) Julian Julian -- Using The Bat! v1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[4]: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Mike, VBG At first the only thing that irritated me was the fact that VBG unlike ZAP, Kerio asked permission for everything... For VBG example, just launching my browser can easily launch open VBG 20+ confirmation boxes and launching my Messenger VBG (I counted this one with show alerts) will open 44. MA Outpost lets you set up permissions for each separate program, so that MA doesn't happen... TF So does Sygate. I was surprised when I noticed that if you allow an TF application to use one port, by default all ports are available to TF that app. Kerio is definitely hot! I thank you all for your input but since Kerio's installation, shes proven easy maintenance :) I did manage to stop the repetitive confirmations and the only problem to it was the program doesn't work like that by default. I had go into it's advanced settings to set it up but it's working excellent and is an awesome Firewall. Thank you Mark and Thomas and everybody else :) - -- Best regards, Victor B. Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.62 Christmas Edition Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Request My PGP Public Keys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] iQA/AwUBPftmeF3LB35+TCg0EQJcHACfbf/+dpYMx4j6dbKpuxg3k7/SgnMAoOau kDvMjPzvhmg0LNdn6FpAonWC =zbHl -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re[2]: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
Hello Thomas, Saturday, December 14, 2002, 2:56:43 PM, you wrote: TF Hello Mike, TF On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 03:26:58 + GMT (14/12/02, 10:26 +0700 GMT), TF Mike Alexander wrote: Outpost lets you set up permissions for each separate program, TF So does Sygate. I was surprised when I noticed that if you allow an TF application to use one port, by default all ports are available to TF that app. I didn't like that a bit. No, nor would I and Outpost doesn't do that. It allows specific ports rather than all ports. TF Why Victor gets 30 message for one application, I don't know. I only TF got one or two per app (for example, with TB, the pop port and the TF smtp port at remote server, which I allowed), save them, and that's TF it. I think the point with Kerio is that you have to save the TF settings, otherwise it will forget them (of course). ;-) With Outpost, any settings you make are automatically saved. You can alter them later if you want. You can even alter the default ones that come built in. I can understand the load of messages though. I've found with Trillian that it took me approximately 20 times to get the permissions set. That was because of different underlying URLs being used across the chat server, and the need to authenticate each one. Plus it came up two or three times because of an attempt to use a different port. So, it can happen but it shouldn't happen with email or browser software which should be tied to a specific URL and port. -- Best regards, Mikemailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Julian, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 16:39:03 + your time, you said: JBL One considerable disadvantage is the size overhead of S/MIME messages I would disagree entirely. JBL the signing process seems to add 6k onto the message size, Not when I sign it doesn't! 3k tops! So I don't know where you get that figure from. JBL and whilst this might be worthwhile for business communications, where JBL the identity of the individual is important, it does not appear to be JBL worthwhile on TBUDL. Oh, I see, so personal identity is inconsequential? cough Okay! And you consider that TBUDL moderators should decide that PGP should be allowed and S/MIME not? Umm, that's very interesting indeed :) ...although that would be very hard to justify as The Bat! supports both, don't you think? And this is The Bat! user discussion list after all, isn't it? Where new users and old congregate to discuss The Bat! features? g JBL At least PGP only adds 1k or so to the message size. Well I think your message is a little misleading, even if unintentional. So to clear up any confusion I carried out some tests: A 629 byte email signed with my S/MIME certificate weighs in at 3,634 bytes. That's only a difference of about 3k, and not the 6k you claim to start. Of course the same 629 byte file PGP clear-signed weighs in at only 993 bytes, which seems to be a very small addition in comparison. *However*, if I then add my PGP key block to the mail as well, which is the true comparison that needs to be made, the 629 byte email suddenly weighs in at 3,591 bytes. So the real differences in size overhead are not that great at all. The mechanism for delivery may be differ - the overall bytes split and delivered in two separate parts - but the size difference isn't significant at all, and of course S/MIME will have an advantage in many respects as the email carries the certificate, unlike PGP, and can be immediately imported without any further requests. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #2076. Mary Qed I Low Ussr ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfuOXstub/5cfolmEQKcxwCgzwrcKmFZH92YrcEmBQJf0vT5jnsAoISc oGuseAqWFooJ2FghCR5IuBEg =aF41 -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: multi user, only one allowed
In [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Thomas Fernandez [TF] wrote:'
TF But a message that has been replied to will have this little
TF arrow on the envelope. The next user accessing the mail base
TF should see it.
Yes, but this doesn't prevent him/her from composing another answer.
Also, the message is flagged as replied only after the reply is
sent. The two users could be composing replies concurrently.
--
-=] Allie C Martin [=- {List Moderator}
MUA: TB! v1.62 Christmas Edition ___ OS: WinXP Pro (SP1)
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
In [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Thomas Fernandez [TF] wrote:'
TF Why Victor gets 30 message for one application, I don't know. I
TF only got one or two per app (for example, with TB, the pop port
TF and the smtp port at remote server, which I allowed), save them,
TF and that's it. I think the point with Kerio is that you have to
TF save the settings, otherwise it will forget them (of course).
Not at all. Sometimes Kerio will come up with a dialog that prompts
for permission for particular ports. However, the application uses a
many local ports, usually a range. It will therefore prompt you each
time to allow each port the application may wish to use.
One way of dealing with this is to allow the application to use all
local ports if it needs to or if you know the exact range of ports,
you can specifically configure them.
--
-=] Allie C Martin [=- {List Moderator}
MUA: TB! v1.62 Christmas Edition ___ OS: WinXP Pro (SP1)
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
In [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Victor Gonzalez [VG] wrote:'
VG Kerio is definitely hot! I thank you all for your input but
VG since Kerio's installation, shes proven easy maintenance :) I
VG did manage to stop the repetitive confirmations and the only
VG problem to it was the program doesn't work like that by default.
VG I had go into it's advanced settings to set it up but it's
VG working excellent and is an awesome Firewall.
I haven't used the later versions but I suspect that the method
you're using to configure is a less secure method, in that Kerio no
longer asks for specific port/IP connection permissions. It will
just ask to allow the application use of all ports and connection
with any remote IP.
It's always a good thing to learn a little behind the permissions
and fine tune them so each application is allowed no more than they
really need.
--
-=] Allie C Martin [=- {List Moderator}
MUA: TB! v1.62 Christmas Edition ___ OS: WinXP Pro (SP1)
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
On Saturday, December 14, 2002, 8:02:38 PM, Simon Blake wrote: Oh, I see, so personal identity is inconsequential? cough Okay! And you consider that TBUDL moderators should decide that PGP should be allowed and S/MIME not? Umm, that's very interesting indeed :) ...although that would be very hard to justify as The Bat! supports both, don't you think? And this is The Bat! user discussion list after all, isn't it? Where new users and old congregate to discuss The Bat! features? g I did not, of course, mean that personal identity is inconsequential, only that the 3k overhead proving it does not seem worth it in the case of a discussion list such as TBUDL. What is important to me on TBUDL is the questions that are asked, and the helpfulness of the replies, not necessarily the identity of the poster. Julian -- Using The Bat! v1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: multi user, only one allowed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Allie, TF But a message that has been replied to will have this little TF arrow on the envelope. The next user accessing the mail base TF should see it. ACM Yes, but this doesn't prevent him/her from composing another answer. IMO, Why not then put your foot down and lay down the rules? Not to be smart but if more than one person is to reply to an e-mail you must be running something that is outside of a personal base. I can only come up with 2 solutions at the moment. 1. Lay down the rules, tell your crew to be aware of multiple replies. Move the replied message to a special folder (already replied to). 2. I am sure there is a rule complex enough to move the messages that need a reply and the replies to folders that should probably only be used for reference. 3. If worst comes to worst it just might benefit you! Any customer I am sure would pend most of their business needs on how well support can handle their request. Sometimes two replies just might be better than one :) 3a. Setup a template that tells the user if you get more than one reply to your message it is because we care and aim for the peaks of good business :) I might not have answered you and I am not a marine but sometimes you just have to make due with what you got and most of the time simply improvise with what you have. ACM Also, the message is flagged as replied only after the reply is ACM sent. The two users could be composing replies concurrently. You must be handling your mail at server level where TB! doesn't handle incoming mail and then divides amongst certain parties... If this is the case it is understandable then why two users could be replying to a message at the same time. My only solution would be to create a new off-line rule. Setup a quick template that tells your partners someone is already replying to the request. A B get a question through the mail. A B are about to both reply to it. A B input their energy and resources into it and the person with the question get's 2 replies. How about A B gets the question. A B either informs the other their answering or A B forward their replies to C. I don't know this is all more idea than it is answers probably but I am really just trying to open your mind if I can. I hope I helped. - -- Best regards, Victor B. Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.62 Christmas Edition Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Request My PGP Public Keys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] iQA/AwUBPfuXj13LB35+TCg0EQKUiQCdETTkz9lV8s5/advYyFdTNMvUyeEAoNYB gqoeqDCQTBhzrTxRVEC3FySW =ToSU -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
In [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Simon [S] wrote:'
S A 629 byte email signed with my S/MIME certificate weighs in at
S 3,634 bytes. That's only a difference of about 3k, and not the 6k
S you claim to start.
The size difference depends on the key size doesn't it?
The difference in message size by over 500%.
S Of course the same 629 byte file PGP clear-signed weighs in at
S only 993 bytes, which seems to be a very small addition in
S comparison.
Yes. An increase in message size of about 50%.
S *However*, if I then add my PGP key block to the mail as well,
S which is the true comparison that needs to be made, the 629 byte
S email suddenly weighs in at 3,591 bytes.
That wouldn't be a true comparison since PGP key blocks are *not*
sent with a PGP signature by default. This is not the case with
S/MIME. Can you suppress sending your public key block repeatedly
and with every message you send using S/MIME? In fact, this is my
main problem with using it.
S So the real differences in size overhead are not that great at
S all. The mechanism for delivery may be differ - the overall bytes
S split and delivered in two separate parts - but the size
S difference isn't significant at all, and of course S/MIME will
S have an advantage in many respects as the email carries the
S certificate, unlike PGP, and can be immediately imported without
S any further requests.
After importing it, I don't need you sending it anymore. With PGP
you can check the signature. If you don't have the key, then it's
auto-retrieved or you can obtain it as desired. Only once.
Consider this:
You sent an entire message amounting to 650 kbytes.
This means that you can send a decently large message that is within
3kbytes in size. Think of the cummulative bandwidth consumption if
everyone were to start using S/MIME as you do, i.e., sending the
3kbyte key block with each and every S/MIME signed message which is
every message?
Say that there are 500 subscribers to this list? Your 650byte
message would amount to 312kbytes of bandwidth. If you send the same
message S/MIME signed ... 3.6kbytes X500 ... 1.8MB! Look at it in a
cummulative sense and you see that it's not really insignificant.
The same problem applies to sending HTML mail with a plain text
version everytime you send mail.
--
-=] Allie C Martin [=- {List Moderator}
MUA: TB! v1.62 Christmas Edition ___ OS: WinXP Pro (SP1)
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: multi user, only one allowed
In [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Victor Gonzalez [VG] wrote:'
VG IMO, Why not then put your foot down and lay down the rules?
VG Not to be smart but if more than one person is to reply to
VG an e-mail you must be running something that is outside of a
VG personal base.
Yes. This is what we're discussing. Multiple users using the same
mailbase.
VG I can only come up with 2 solutions at the moment.
VG 1. Lay down the rules, tell your crew to be aware of
VG multiple replies. Move the replied message to a special
VG folder (already replied to).
Yes. However, this will not deal with the problem of two users who
happen to be composing replies concurrently.
VG 3a. Setup a template that tells the user if you get
VG more than one reply to your message it is because we
VG care and aim for the peaks of good business :)
Hehe! :)
Well, one way of doing this would be to stratify the mail. Only
particular users handle particular mail. This will help to avoid
confusion.
VG I might not have answered you and I am not a marine but
VG sometimes you just have to make due with what you got and
VG most of the time simply improvise with what you have.
Indeed. :) This is probably what will happen but Klass-Jan was just
testing the waters to see if there's functionality that he isn't
aware of.
VG If this is the case it is understandable then why two users
VG could be replying to a message at the same time.
VG My only solution would be to create a new off-line rule.
VG Setup a quick template that tells your partners someone is
VG already replying to the request.
I don't think the creation of such a template is possible. The
templates in TB! are for messaging. It only provides methods of
automatically inputting text, adjusting message headers, or to add
attachments to mail. They can't be used to notify another user of
something.
--
-=] Allie C Martin [=- {List Moderator}
MUA: TB! v1.62 Christmas Edition ___ OS: WinXP Pro (SP1)
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Allie, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 16:10:38 -0500 your time, you said: ACM This is not the case with S/MIME. Can you suppress sending your public ACM key block repeatedly and with every message you send using S/MIME? In ACM fact, this is my main problem with using it. That's not the point here at all really, although it is a valid point of course. So are you suggesting that The Bat! should not support S/MIME? And are you suggesting or leading up to a banning of S/MIME use on the list? ACM You sent an entire message amounting to 650 kbytes. This means that you ACM can send a decently large message that is within 3kbytes in size. Think ACM of the cummulative bandwidth consumption ...snip So what are you saying? That unless it is plain text and pgp signed then it isn't or shouldn't be welcomed? If users want to join the list and ask questions about and learn how to use S/MIME then I don't think it should be discouraged on the basis of bandwidth issues. But if bandwidth really is an issue then you are in a real predicament as to ban the use of one method would automatically suggest favour toward the other, which people can read in many ways of course. I want to be able to securely communicate with as many people as possible, and if that means using both PGP and S/MIME so be it. Yes, with S/MIME you send your cert. over and over and over, unlike PGP, and of course extra bandwidth is used in the process, I concede that. But that's the way to propagate the standard though, and of course the more visible it is the more likely it is to become commonplace, regardless of any bandwidth issues. To to be frank, the bandwidth issue doesn't bother me in the slightest, and I don't think it bothers that many people either, in my unverifiable view. Nonetheless, I accept that it may be of concern for the list owner though, and well, someone will have to make some tough decisions in that case. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1249. Lars Dewy I Mrs Quo ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfut08tub/5cfolmEQKI3gCg02XCkGZsDIpC1XAE7Ezc4qvK4cgAnAyr 2e4LXH1nG9Je0wnESrIYQ0// =cOnk -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
On Saturday, December 14, 2002, 10:16:51 PM, Simon Blake wrote: ACM This is not the case with S/MIME. Can you suppress sending your public ACM key block repeatedly and with every message you send using S/MIME? In ACM fact, this is my main problem with using it. That's not the point here at all really, although it is a valid point of course. So are you suggesting that The Bat! should not support S/MIME? And are you suggesting or leading up to a banning of S/MIME use on the list? I am not sure where you get the suggestion that TB! should not support S/MIME from, because I am certainly not suggesting that. What I am suggesting is that S/MIME signing is not necessary in the context of a discussion list where the identity of the poster is not important. Neither am I suggesting that S/MIME or PGP be banned from the list - merely that posters consider the value of signing messages sent to TBUDL and the bandwidth implications, not least for those on the list who use slow and expensive dialup connections. For the record, I have an ADSL connection, so message size does not bother me, although I do have concerns about the ecology of the internet (which is why I don't like HTML messages). I feel that you may think that this discussion is an attack on your rights to use S/MIME or PGP, which it certainly is not, and I am sorry if I have given you this impression, Simon. Julian -- Using The Bat! v1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Replies kept in same folder as received
TBUDL, 1. This question may be obvious, but I've used Bat! for a long time, and can't remember (or find out) how to do it. After incoming mail is filtered it is moved. Let's say from Inbox to MyTopicFolder. Now I reply to a message in MyTopicFolder. The reply should be stored in MyTopicFolder, not in Sent Mail. How do I do that (for the entire account, not just one folder)? I hope to avoid writing a sorting filter for each folder in the whole account just to move from the Sent Mail back to MyTopicFolder. There should be some global account setting for this need. 2. A related but different question. If I compose and send a new message (not a reply to anything), can I instruct Bat to deposit the sent mail into the currently selected folder? Regards. M. Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Julian, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 22:36:28 + your time, you said: JBL On Saturday, December 14, 2002, 10:16:51 PM, Simon Blake wrote: ACM This is not the case with S/MIME. Can you suppress sending your ACM public key block repeatedly and with every message you send using ACM S/MIME? In fact, this is my main problem with using it. That's not the point here at all really, although it is a valid point of course. So are you suggesting that The Bat! should not support S/MIME? And are you suggesting or leading up to a banning of S/MIME use on the list? JBL What I am suggesting is that S/MIME signing is not necessary in the JBL context of a discussion list where the identity of the poster is not JBL important... snip I really did understand, and call me stubborn, but I still disagree. The delivery method of S/MIME is different to PGP... and I know that some people see it as 'bandwidth unfriendly', but that's the way it works, and people are going to have to learn to live with it. This is the direction that we are moving in: technologies are using more and more bandwidth as they are developed and increase in popularity. Web boards, newsgroup downloads, graphic intensive sites, flash animations, streaming audio and video, software updates, OS updates, desktop delivery, HTML email, S/MIME, etc. all eat bandwidth, and as we are encouraged to use them the 'system' expands - albeit at a price to those hoping to profit out of it - to accommodate our usage. But we _have already moved_ into the bandwidth intensive era as far as I am concerned, and that is being encouraged via the services being levelled at end users. Therefore the Internet bandwidth argument is just fallacious to me. So, suggesting that it is OK to PGP sign because it is bandwidth friendly and not to S/MIME sign because it isn't flies in the face of the current reality. And to accede to others' requests not to use S/MIME would be an immediate submission to very localized preferences and indicate some lacking in ability or will to keep in tune with the way things are moving. JBL I feel that you may think that this discussion is an attack on your JBL rights to use S/MIME or PGP, which it certainly is not, and I am sorry JBL if I have given you this impression, Simon. No, no need to apologize at all, really :) As I have indicated already, in some way or another, if S/MIME certification died a death tomorrow I wouldn't shed any tears - apart from the fact that I'd lose the ability to be able to communicate with a significant percentage of email users. But my lack of grief _wouldn't_ be based on bandwidth considerations, no, but simply on my *preference* for PGP as I personally find it more suited to my uses...and I value the level of control it affords me. I am not really an advocate of S/MIME in the strictest sense as I would push PGP (and do) before S/MIME any day, but I nonetheless acknowledge S/MIME's current value, and believe that other users should comes to terms with its presence and usage. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #1436. Awl Qed Rio My Ussr ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfvGBctub/5cfolmEQL0+gCfc/Cs8/AvtY1WbXmgI/8aLkBGzLwAoJM8 JCCSqTLzmx4ycYA63e0TVu7o =24p9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: SmartBat new features?
Hello Dierk, On Saturday, December 14, 2002 at 12:47:01 PM you [DH] wrote (at least in part): I guess it's not for integrating different editors, but more for being able to switch between Editor and e.g. Calendar and whatever should come with PIM functionality which is announced. DH Then I want at least the editor of my choice being in SmartBat instead DH of Notepad. I guess Notepad is just a name in this context. This editor, currently included and used, does not have anything in common with Notepad for me, except the fact is allows to enter characters. Notepad is not capable of displaying bold characters, nor colored ones. It does not evaluate e.g. the Calculator makro, etc, etc. So I guess chances are not very high the editor will change, but the same low chances are the real Notepad will be used. -- Regards Peter Palmreuther (The Bat! v1.62 Beta/17 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1) In short, N is Richardian if, and only if, N is not Richardian. Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: SmartBat new features?
Hello Jan, On Saturday, December 14, 2002 at 1:56:37 PM you [JR] wrote (at least in part): PP [...] I guess it's not for integrating PP different editors, but more for being PP able to switch between Editor and e.g. PP Calendar and whatever should come with PP PIM functionality which is announced. PP [/...] JR Sorry, I must have missed this. There was JR an announced PIM functionality for TB! ? JR Can you point me to it or was it to the JR German list? TIA Don't know if I've read something about this on TBBETA or only on German list. Chances are this information was only given by German distributor ... All I know is: Stefan is working on it and it was planed to be already released but not stable enough, not even for a Beta yet. -- Regards Peter Palmreuther (The Bat! v1.62 Beta/17 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1) Include this in your CONFIG.SYS File: BUGS=OFF. Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Simon [S] wrote:'
S That's not the point here at all really, although it is a valid
S point of course. So are you suggesting that The Bat! should not
S support S/MIME? And are you suggesting or leading up to a banning
S of S/MIME use on the list?
There's no need to take the discussion in this direction. If I had a
problem with the use of S/MIME, I'd have said so. I prefer to use
PGP and I've given the reason. Bandwidth considerations. Please take
it as is and not try to extrapolate.
So what are you saying? That unless it is plain text and pgp
signed then it isn't or shouldn't be welcomed?
Nope. I am simply refuting your comment that 3 extra kilobytes per
S/MIME signed message is negligible. It's by no means negligible
when you look at it cumulatively. You mentioned that comparing PGP
signatures without including the PGP key block wasn't fair. I
disagree and say that it is fair and that PGP is just more bandwidth
friendly. I personally dislike S/MIME primarily for this reason.
How does this translate to S/MIME signatures not being welcome?
If users want to join the list and ask questions about and learn
how to use S/MIME then I don't think it should be discouraged on
the basis of bandwidth issues. But if bandwidth really is an issue
then you are in a real predicament as to ban the use of one method
would automatically suggest favour toward the other, which people
can read in many ways of course.
Again, I'm not discouraging or banning the use of it. You're blowing
this Waaay out of proportion.
Can't I state a personal opinion of argue the advantages and
disadvantages of a particular tool without it being translated into
my changes the list rules based on my personal opinion/s?
If I wish to ban or discourage the use of S/MIME I'll make this very
clear.
I want to be able to securely communicate with as many people as
possible, and if that means using both PGP and S/MIME so be it.
Yes, with S/MIME you send your cert. over and over and over,
unlike PGP, and of course extra bandwidth is used in the
process, I concede that. But that's the way to propagate the
standard though, and of course the more visible it is the more
likely it is to become commonplace, regardless of any bandwidth
issues. To to be frank, the bandwidth issue doesn't bother me in
the slightest, and I don't think it bothers that many people
either, in my unverifiable view.
Bandwidth consumption doesn't bother me either as long as it's
justifiable. Using S/MIME is arguably one of them. Note that I say
'arguably'.
- --
-=] Allie C Martin [=- {List Moderator}
MUA: TB! v1.62 Christmas Edition ___ OS: WinXP Pro (SP1)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (Win32) - GPGshell v2.65
Comment: PubKeys: http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html
iD8DBQE9+8yFV8nrYCsHF+IRAtBRAJ9cm8pT4XChNRvp5fa2F4GB0h1XqACdFRNi
bzfshtApOmfD5PWPKZ/KXRw=
=7edU
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Replies kept in same folder as received
Hallo M., On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:45:55 -0700GMT (14-12-02, 23:45 +0100GMT, where I live), you wrote: ME The reply should be stored in MyTopicFolder, not in Sent Mail. How ME do I do that (for the entire account, not just one folder)? You can't do that, unless you write a filter for each folder and even then you'd better hope that your filters can be triggered by the same rules as your incoming mail. If that's not the case you'd need folder templates that id the folder you've written the mail, so that your filters can recognize the originating folders. ME I hope to avoid writing a sorting filter for each folder in the whole ME account just to move from the Sent Mail back to MyTopicFolder. There ME should be some global account setting for this need. Nope. ME If I compose and send a new message (not a reply to anything), can I ME instruct Bat to deposit the sent mail into the currently selected ME folder? The only difference TB makes between replies, new messages and forwards is the template it offers you before you start composing. After that they're treated the same. The only way to do something like this and still to be able to use address book templates (I wouldn't like to give up those.) is to cheat TB. Since you can't use folder templates to differentiate between folders, because AB-templates take precedence before folder templates, cheating is the way to go. Don't start creating new folders, but create new accounts every time you need a new folder. Set the properties for every account the same as your primary account, but don't allow them to collect mail. If they all would collect mail, you'd need all of your incoming filters in all of your accounts. Your outgoing messages will be kept in the originating account, that's not necessarily the same as the originating folder, but it we're almost there. Since all outgoing messages are collected in 'Sent messages' the only thing you need to achieve is to get your incoming messages into 'Sent messages' too. That's easy. You're filtering incoming messages anyhow. In stead of filtering your messages to folders in your primary account, you start to filter them into another account, however you need to point to a target folder in that account, so why not make that 'Sent messages'? This way you can use the %account macro in your AB-templates to point to the folder/account where you'd like to store all correspondence with that contact. -- Groetjes, Roelof Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Backing up folders
Hallo Lawrence, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:05:59 -0600GMT (14-12-02, 17:05 +0100GMT, where I live), you wrote: LJ Is it safe to backup the corresponding Windows folders Yes. -- Groetjes, Roelof Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Resizeable Quick Templates Window.
Hi Allie, Regarding your message dated: 14 December 2002... ACM Make a feature request. ACM Go via the TBUDL info URL in the list footer of all messages from ACM this list. Thanks for the info. I've done as suggested and the feature request is logged as item number 0001125 on the bug/feature tracker system. Best Wishes, Mark -- - Using TheBat! 1.62 Christmas Edition Windows XP 5 1 2600 - Just4Fun - Freestuff, Humour and More! - http://just4fun.ipfox.com/ - Mark R Harding The Integrated Systems Group (Vision) Department of Electronics Electrical Engineering The University of Edinburgh, King's Buildings, Mayfield Road Edinburgh. EH9 3JL. Scotland. U.K. Phone: +44 (0)131 650 5662 Fax:+44 (0)131 650 6554 Email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] URL:http://www.ee.ed.ac.uk/~mrh/ - Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Allie, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 19:27:50 -0500 your time, you said: S That's not the point here at all really, although it is a valid point of S course. So are you suggesting that The Bat! should not support S/MIME? S And are you suggesting or leading up to a banning of S/MIME use on the S list? ACM There's no need to take the discussion in this direction...snip Sorry, I don't understand Allie! I simply asked you two further questions which I didn't think were unreasonable questions and certainly can't see how they could have caused you any offense in any way. Nonetheless, if they did offend you in any way then I of course apologize. ACM Nope. I am simply refuting your comment that 3 extra kilobytes per ACM S/MIME signed message is negligible. It's by no means negligible when ACM you look at it cumulatively. And a point I acknowledged. ACM You mentioned that comparing PGP signatures without including the PGP ACM key block wasn't fair. That is correct the way I was presenting it. And of course I was trying to show that when bandwidth wasn't a consideration that the actual email size for both technologies was very similar when signed and keyed/certificated; I was attempting to dispel the implication that one technology was significantly superior because it was simply smaller in use than the other, which is not the case at all. Cumulatively, I agree that one *uses* more bandwidth than the other. ACM How does this translate to S/MIME signatures not being welcome? It was a question Allie, based on your comments: AM Think of the cummulative bandwidth consumption if everyone were to start AM using S/MIME as you do, i.e., sending the 3kbyte key block with each and AM every S/MIME signed message which is every message? snip Again, I believe it was a fair question based on your above comments. Your remarks certainly don't encourage the use of S/MIME do they: Think of the cummulative bandwidth consumption if everyone were to start using S/MIME as you do. I was getting you to clarify your position, that's all. And now you have done that, and so there's no problem is there :) If users want to join the list and ask questions about and learn how to use S/MIME then I don't think it should be discouraged on the basis of bandwidth issues. But if bandwidth really is an issue then you are in a real predicament as to ban the use of one method would automatically suggest favour toward the other, which people can read in many ways of course. ACM Again, I'm not discouraging or banning the use of it. You're blowing ACM this Waaay out of proportion. I don't feel that I am blowing anything out of proportion Allie. I am responding to your comments, and some other list users concerns, in this interesting thread about PGP and S/MIME standards, and latterly, the excessive use of bandwidth by using S/MIME on TBUDL. I don't see any problem with this, and I don't think anyone has got nasty, or upset, or there is any reason for you to feel that is is *Wy* out of proportion. I do feel that as a moderator when you offer your opinion you cannot expect to be totally detached from your role and as such that you should expect responses such as mine when you indicate personal concerns about cummulative bandwidth consumption by users of S/MIME certificates such as me. I am sorry if that makes you feel uncomfortable or like you are being got at. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #735. Mila Dress Quo Wry ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfvY28tub/5cfolmEQLCmwCgg1LQdGdKeuDSQPVP3qL8X3MxRAUAoN3o Du+8EK60AQodrf3nnN0i1T36 =tb0/ -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
Hi Simon, @14-Dec-2002, 22:16 Simon Blake said: ACM This is not the case with S/MIME. Can you suppress sending ACM your public key block repeatedly and with every message you ACM send using S/MIME? In fact, this is my main problem with using ACM it. Not yet with TB, although it is within the S/MIME specification for this to be done. That's not the point here at all really, although it is a valid point of course. Indeed. So are you suggesting that The Bat! should not support S/MIME? No!! And are you suggesting or leading up to a banning of S/MIME use on the list? Most certainly *not*. It is a valid thing to do, both with TB and here (for practice if nothing else). So what are you saying? That unless it is plain text and pgp signed then it isn't or shouldn't be welcomed? Not at all. I know Allie did not say, mean or even imply that and I'm sorry that you took it that way. I sign with PGP and sometimes with S/MIME. I want to be able to securely communicate with as many people as possible, and if that means using both PGP and S/MIME so be it. Yes, me too! (oops - that's not allowed here!) ... Nonetheless, I accept that it may be of concern for the list owner though, and well, someone will have to make some tough decisions in that case. Not here - decision already made a while back with no chance of a change. S/MIME is welcome here. Heck - Max Masiutin always signs with S/MIME. -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2 ' smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: Replies kept in same folder as received
Hello M., On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:45:55 -0700 GMT (15/12/02, 05:45 +0700 GMT), M. Evans wrote: The reply should be stored in MyTopicFolder, not in Sent Mail. How do I do that (for the entire account, not just one folder)? You need to write a filter for each folder. :-( I hope to avoid writing a sorting filter for each folder in the whole account just to move from the Sent Mail back to MyTopicFolder. There should be some global account setting for this need. Should is the keyword here. I only know that the filtering system is being completely rewritten, and I hope that your wish (which has been mentioned by others a couple of times) will be fulfilled. 2. A related but different question. If I compose and send a new message (not a reply to anything), can I instruct Bat to deposit the sent mail into the currently selected folder? I agree, this question is directly related, and so is the answer. ;-) -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. Shopping tip: You can get shoes for 85 cents at bowling alleys. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.62 Christmas Edition under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
question one
Hello TBUDL, I am a Pegasus mail user and have been for some time but find that the programme is a little hamstrung by the fact that the Auther loves his programme (God bless his soul) and refuses to release the code so others can help him work on it (well in a nutshell that is) and he has other projects to contend with as well, so releases are slow and far and few between. I have however paid for two of his manuals to help the development, a small token I know but none the less my part. I will do the same for TB after I have evaluated it for a while. Pegasus is now up to V4 and I notice that when I try to get the Bat to covert messages it must be looking for V3 type files as it just spits the dummy and tells me there is nothing in the DIR, is there a work around please? -- Best regards, Tony mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
Hello Mike, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:54:18 + GMT (15/12/02, 01:54 +0700 GMT), Mike Alexander wrote: TF Why Victor gets 30 message for one application, I don't know. I only TF got one or two per app (for example, with TB, the pop port and the TF smtp port at remote server, which I allowed), save them, and that's TF it. I think the point with Kerio is that you have to save the TF settings, otherwise it will forget them (of course). ;-) With Outpost, any settings you make are automatically saved. Well, I wouldn't like this. Sometimes I just want to let a connection go through only this once. I don't want to have to go into the innards of the firewall afterwards and delete a rule I never meant to create. Kerio le's me choose whether to just permit or to create a rule. -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. I used to have an open mind but my brains kept falling out. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.62 Christmas Edition under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
S/MIME on ML's (was: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm)
Hello Simon, On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 00:00:05 + GMT (15/12/02, 07:00 +0700 GMT), Simon Blake wrote: ACM This is not the case with S/MIME. Can you suppress sending your ACM public key block repeatedly and with every message you send using ACM S/MIME? In fact, this is my main problem with using it. That's not the point here at all really, although it is a valid point of course. For me, this *is* the point. Why do you need to send me your certificate over and over again, with each message? I imported it the first time, thanks. JBL What I am suggesting is that S/MIME signing is not necessary in the JBL context of a discussion list where the identity of the poster is not JBL important... snip I really did understand, and call me stubborn, but I still disagree. The delivery method of S/MIME is different to PGP... and I know that some people see it as 'bandwidth unfriendly', but that's the way it works, and people are going to have to learn to live with it. This last sentence prompted me to type this reply (other than that, I agree with Allie). What you are saying is, I have ADSL, I don't notice any difference in bandwidth, so let's waste it as much as we can. You go on to say that others waste bandwidth as well (flash etc), so it should be OK. I have news for you. You live in a highly-industrialised country, and you won't notice the waste you create. The newsflash is that not eveybody lives in a highly-industrialised country. Have you any idea how much the internet backbone between Bangkok and Phnom Penh cost and what the *total* bandwidth of that is? Bandwidth is not free, somebody has to pay for it. Cambodia now has three international links; let's waste most of it with S/MIME certificates on mailing lists, yeah. OK, I live in Bangkok, which is in a slightly better situation: we have a few more cables (and satellite links), as there are a lot more internet users here. Each of who experiences a speed that is a little fraction of the speed that you take for granted. Every now and then, one of the several-megabyte international links break, and every single internet user in Thailand can feel it. Web pages take minutes to load, Emails download at 200 CPS, and so on. But bandwidth doesn't matter to you, so let's send the S/MIME certificate with every posting, just for the heck of it. People in developing countries should get used to it and stop whining. Yeah. This is the direction that we are moving in: technologies are using more and more bandwidth as they are developed and increase in popularity. And that is *not* OK, contrary to your beliefs. Oh, and did I mention that there are no flat rates in Thailand, and I connect by pay-per-minute dial-up? ADSL is hardly affordable and, so people say, not really faster than dial-up. Cable connections simply don't exist. but I nonetheless acknowledge S/MIME's current value, and believe that other users should comes to terms with its presence and usage. If you want to prove your identity with every message (i.e. show me your passport each time you utter any sentence), do that in a PM environment, if your mails are so sensitive. I can see absolutely no value of posting your S/MIME certificate on a mailing list with every posting. The only ones who I wold encourage to sign (PGP preferred) their messages are the mods, because if someone impersonates them, havoc could be caused. Unless, of course, testing and learning S/MIME is the issue. People are not discouraged to ask about TB's S/MIME function, and it is only natural that this requires them to S/MIME sign the related messages to see whether it works. -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. Despite the cost of living, have you noticed how it remains so popular? Message reply created with The Bat! 1.62 Christmas Edition under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
Hello Allie, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:13:02 -0500 GMT (15/12/02, 03:13 +0700 GMT), Allie C Martin wrote: I haven't used the later versions but I suspect that the method you're using to configure is a less secure method, in that Kerio no longer asks for specific port/IP connection permissions. It will just ask to allow the application use of all ports and connection with any remote IP. No, the dialog box will ask three questions: Local port Remote port Protocol (TCP, UDP, ICMP) You can then also fine tune that. -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. George Best (Englische Nationalmannschaft 1966): Ich habe viel von meinem Geld fuer Alkohol, Weiber und schnelle Autos ausgegeben. Den Rest habe ich einfach verprasst. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.62 Christmas Edition under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
question 2
Hello TBUDL, I know lots of questions, sorry :-( I am running SpamPal to kill all these bl**dy spam messages I get hammered with. In Pegasus when the email is directed to the folder I have designated I don't get the flapping horse wings telling me I have new mail as it is no longer in the inbox, however with the bat, I have to read the spam before TB stops flapping, is there a workaround for this please? -- Best regards, Tony mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: multi user, only one allowed
Hello Allie, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:04:02 -0500 GMT (15/12/02, 03:04 +0700 GMT), Allie C Martin wrote: TF But a message that has been replied to will have this little TF arrow on the envelope. The next user accessing the mail base TF should see it. Yes, but this doesn't prevent him/her from composing another answer. That is correct. TB does not replace a user's brain. Also, the message is flagged as replied only after the reply is sent. ... put in the Outbox, you mean. The two users could be composing replies concurrently. Yes. Intra-company communication is often useful. This could include asking across the desk: did you see the mail from Mr M?, or someone being reponsible for dsitributing the mails to different staff, or a system under which every knows which kind of mail to reply to, or whatever system may be useful for the particular company. TB doesn't replace a manager and a policy yet, but maybe v2 will have a plug-in for that. ;-) -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. Ad: Our experienced Mom will care of your child. Fenced yard, meals, and smacks included. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.62 Christmas Edition under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
Hello Allie, On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:09:10 -0500 GMT (15/12/02, 03:09 +0700 GMT), Allie C Martin wrote: TF Why Victor gets 30 message for one application, I don't know. I TF only got one or two per app (for example, with TB, the pop port TF and the smtp port at remote server, which I allowed), save them, TF and that's it. I think the point with Kerio is that you have to TF save the settings, otherwise it will forget them (of course). Not at all. Sometimes Kerio will come up with a dialog that prompts for permission for particular ports. However, the application uses a many local ports, usually a range. It will therefore prompt you each time to allow each port the application may wish to use. OK. What I did is I allowed TB to connect to port 110 on any remote server, using any local port. The local port doesn't really matter to me, does it? One way of dealing with this is to allow the application to use all local ports if it needs to I don't know whether TB needs to, but I don't know why I should restrict this. Should I? -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. You can observe a lot just by watchin'. (Yogi Berra) Message reply created with The Bat! 1.62 Christmas Edition under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: question one
In reply to Tony's message 'question one' on Sun, 15 Dec 2002 12:36:05 +1100 from [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Tony, TE Pegasus is now up to V4 and I notice that when I try to get the TE Bat to covert messages it must be looking for V3 type files as it TE just spits the dummy and tells me there is nothing in the DIR, is TE there a work around please? I have always found the easiest way to convert between mail programs is to set up your own IMAP mail server temporarily and just drag the messages over between the server. Doesn't Mercury do this? Failing that, using Outlook Express as an in-between conversion is also remarkably helpful at times. Other than that, I have no other suggestions, I also was an ex-Pegasus user until i discovered The Bat, but this was before v4, and I never had any problems converting that i can remember :) -- dan. e [EMAIL PROTECTED] w http://www.danhirning.com Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: question 2
In reply to Tony's message 'question 2' on Sun, 15 Dec 2002 12:39:16 +1100 from [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Tony, TE I don't get the flapping horse wings telling me I have new mail as TE it is no longer in the inbox, however with the bat, I have to read TE the spam before TB stops flapping, is there a workaround for this TE please? In your filter that is moving the spam to its specific folder, click the 'Actions' tab, and click 'mark message as read' - its the first option on the tab. having said that, its not what i do. - I have disabled the flapping bat (it use to cause problems once upon a time) - and use the mail ticker. You can select what messages are displayed on the mail ticker by right clicking the mail ticker, or properties of each folder. Learn to use the mail ticker, it took me a long time to 'like it' but now I think its one of the best features of the bat... -- dan. e [EMAIL PROTECTED] w http://www.danhirning.com Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: question 2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Tony, @15-Dec-2002, 12:39 +1100 (01:39 UK time) Tony Evans [TE] in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: TE ... I have to read the spam before TB stops flapping, is there TE a workaround for this please? You can have the filter mark the message as read when moving it to the spam folder or (as I do) turn off the flapping wings completely and rely on the Ticker to show me new mail I care about. - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows 2000 5.0.2195 Service Pack 2 ' -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1rc1-nr1 (Windows 2000) iD8DBQE9+96kOeQkq5KdzaARAh1iAKCUbZYWohFpCiNZ3PyoftomEoIQjQCg+XOu N2+dfdHwbqOJ9P47pcWhXkE= =UmAF -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: question one
Hello Daniel, Sunday, December 15, 2002, 12:41:42 PM, you wrote: DH In reply to Tony's message 'question one' on Sun, 15 Dec 2002 12:36:05 DH +1100 from [EMAIL PROTECTED]: DH I have always found the easiest way to convert between mail programs DH is to set up your own IMAP mail server temporarily and just drag the DH messages over between the server. I'm sure you give me way to much credit :-) If this is a simple thing to do I'm happy to give it a go DH Doesn't Mercury do this? I thought Mercury was a server based app, I am a desktop user DH Failing that, using Outlook Express as an in-between conversion is also DH remarkably helpful at times. Ok I'm even happy to try that but I still need to convert my Pegasus 4 boxes to Outlook Express :-( DH Other than that, I have no other suggestions, I also was an ex-Pegasus DH user until i discovered The Bat, but this was before v4, and I never had DH any problems converting that i can remember :) Yes the Bat looks a very nice app indeed -- Best regards, Tonymailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: S/MIME on ML's (was: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused byZoneAlarm)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 'Lo Thomas, On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 08:15:01 +0700 your time, you said: snip I bow out of this thread. Sorry, Thomas, but if you want to email me offlist with your personal remarks then that's fine. I'll defend myself in private. - -- Slán, Simon @ theycallmesimon.co.uk ** PGP Key: http://pgp.theycallmesimon.co.uk/ Faffing about with TB! v1.62 on W2K SP3 #155. Dear Squirm Sly Ow ¶ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Privacy is freedom. Protect your freedom with PGP! Comment: KeyID: 0x5C7E8966 Comment: Fingerprint: 851C F927 0296 FF1C 70A2 474F CB6E 6FFE 5C7E 8966 iQA/AwUBPfvfkctub/5cfolmEQKmGgCgrSiR24+juHErWE0XjsmdzJTiV/oAoOEh xwR46hKRimcNsUPhXema6lF5 =mj4j -END PGP SIGNATURE- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re[2]: question 2
Hello Daniel, Sunday, December 15, 2002, 12:44:52 PM, you wrote: DH In reply to Tony's message 'question 2' on Sun, 15 Dec 2002 12:39:16 DH +1100 from [EMAIL PROTECTED]: DH Tony, TE I don't get the flapping horse wings telling me I have new mail as TE it is no longer in the inbox, however with the bat, I have to read TE the spam before TB stops flapping, is there a workaround for this TE please? DH In your filter that is moving the spam to its specific folder, click the DH 'Actions' tab, and click 'mark message as read' - its the first option DH on the tab. DH having said that, its not what i do. - I have disabled the flapping bat DH (it use to cause problems once upon a time) - and use the mail ticker. DH You can select what messages are displayed on the mail ticker by right DH clicking the mail ticker, or properties of each folder. DH Learn to use the mail ticker, it took me a long time to 'like it' but DH now I think its one of the best features of the bat... Thanks to BOTH you and Mark for your suggestions, sometimes its the simplest things, (runs and hides with head down) -- Best regards, Tonymailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Replies kept in same folder as received
Hello M., On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 15:45:55 -0700 GMT (15/12/02, 05:45 +0700 GMT), M. Evans wrote: The reply should be stored in MyTopicFolder, not in Sent Mail. How do I do that (for the entire account, not just one folder)? [...] If I compose and send a new message (not a reply to anything), can I instruct Bat to deposit the sent mail into the currently selected folder? Roelof's reply just triggered my memory: In your Reply or New Message templates, add a macro: %Comment=%Folder This will write the folder name into the headers and you can filter on that. -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. Many people quit looking for work when they find a job. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.62 Christmas Edition under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
Hello Thomas, Sunday, December 15, 2002, 1:17:25 AM, you wrote: TF Hello Mike, TF On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:54:18 + GMT (15/12/02, 01:54 +0700 GMT), TF Mike Alexander wrote: TF Why Victor gets 30 message for one application, I don't know. I only TF got one or two per app (for example, with TB, the pop port and the TF smtp port at remote server, which I allowed), save them, and that's TF it. I think the point with Kerio is that you have to save the TF settings, otherwise it will forget them (of course). ;-) With Outpost, any settings you make are automatically saved. TF Well, I wouldn't like this. Sometimes I just want to let a connection TF go through only this once. I don't want to have to go into the TF innards of the firewall afterwards and delete a rule I never meant to TF create. Kerio le's me choose whether to just permit or to create a TF rule. g Well, yes, Out[post gives you that choice too, along with blocking the particular port or particular connection. I was just pointing out that you didn't have to do that and could allow an automatic save by selecting the right radio button. Sorry, I didn't explain it fully. Let's face it, we both have firewalls we really like and are happy with and personally, after having Zone Alarm screw up my computer I'm just glad of that. So let's say they are equal top shall we? ;-) -- Best regards, Mikemailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[3]: question one
In reply to Tony's message 'question one' on Sun, 15 Dec 2002 12:47:10 +1100 from [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Tony, TE I'm sure you give me way to much credit :-) If this is a simple TE thing to do I'm happy to give it a go It's not hard, but it might be a little confusing. The idea is to setup a mail server locally on your computer and than copy the messages between the two email clients. DH Doesn't Mercury do this? TE I thought Mercury was a server based app, I am a desktop user Yes, this is what you want, however, Mercury doesn't support IMAP like i thought it did. My mistake. I can't remember the program I used, I did a google search and couldn't come up with anything that would be helpful. I will try and think, but I'm suspecting someone else on TBUDL will be able to give a recommendation. I have thought actually of potentially an easier way... TB can import Unix mailboxes. So, in Pegasus, create some Unix mailboxes, and dump your messages into them. Than, in TB, Tools - Import messages - Unix mailboxes and give that a go... -- dan. e [EMAIL PROTECTED] w http://www.danhirning.com Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[4]: question one
Hello Daniel, Sunday, December 15, 2002, 1:06:52 PM, you wrote: DH In reply to Tony's message 'question one' on Sun, 15 Dec 2002 12:47:10 DH +1100 from [EMAIL PROTECTED]: DH Tony, TE I'm sure you give me way to much credit :-) If this is a simple TE thing to do I'm happy to give it a go DH It's not hard, but it might be a little confusing. The idea is to setup DH a mail server locally on your computer and than copy the messages DH between the two email clients. DH Doesn't Mercury do this? TE I thought Mercury was a server based app, I am a desktop user DH Yes, this is what you want, however, Mercury doesn't support IMAP like i DH thought it did. My mistake. I can't remember the program I used, I did a DH google search and couldn't come up with anything that would be helpful. DH I will try and think, but I'm suspecting someone else on TBUDL will be DH able to give a recommendation. DH I have thought actually of potentially an easier way... DH TB can import Unix mailboxes. DH So, in Pegasus, create some Unix mailboxes, and dump your messages into DH them. Than, in TB, Tools - Import messages - Unix mailboxes and give DH that a go... OK I'll give it a fly, if you don't see me again you'll know I've blown up cheers -- Best regards, Tonymailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused by ZoneAlarm
Hello Mike, On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 02:03:21 + GMT (15/12/02, 09:03 +0700 GMT), Mike Alexander wrote: ;-) With Outpost, any settings you make are automatically saved. TF Well, I wouldn't like this. g Well, yes, Out[post gives you that choice too, So let's say they are equal top shall we? ;-) OK. :-) -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. 42.7 percent of all statistics are made up on the spot. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.62 Christmas Edition under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Replies kept in same folder as received
Hello M., Saturday, December 14, 2002, 11:45:55 PM, you asked: ME After incoming mail is filtered it is moved. Let's say from Inbox to ME MyTopicFolder. Now I reply to a message in MyTopicFolder. ME The reply should be stored in MyTopicFolder, not in Sent Mail. How ME do I do that (for the entire account, not just one folder)? ME I hope to avoid writing a sorting filter for each folder in the whole ME account just to move from the Sent Mail back to MyTopicFolder. There ME should be some global account setting for this need. You could send yourself a bcc using the %bcc in your reply template and when the message comes back, the same filtering scheme you're already using should put it where you want it. ME 2. A related but different question. ME If I compose and send a new message (not a reply to anything), can I ME instruct Bat to deposit the sent mail into the currently selected ME folder? The same solution would apply if you generate your email address in the bcc slot in the new mail template. Douglas (Check your signature delimiter). -- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: S/MIME on ML's (was: It's true - *Freezing* Is caused byZoneAlarm)
Hello Simon, On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 at 01:49:05[GMT +](which was 01:49 where I live) you wrote: SB I bow out of this thread. Sorry, Thomas, but if you want to email me offlist SB with your personal remarks then that's fine. I'll defend myself in private. After Thomas's excellent mail I wouldn't have thought you *had* much of a defence :-) -- Best regards, Richard Using The Bat! version 1.62 Beta/17 with Windows 2000 (build 2195), version 5.0 Service Pack 3 and using the best browser: Opera. Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
