Re: Addressing email

[Roelof Otten]

Hallo rich,

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 18:15:38 -0400GMT (15-8-2004, 0:15 +0200, where I
live), you wrote:

RG> How, in your third line above, did you enter the 2 handles to begin
RG> with?

handle1 comma space handle2 tab (tab to go to the next header)

RG> Did you use ANY keystroke(s) at all to indicate to TB! that it
RG> had correctly guessed the correct email address by it's handle?

No, TB starts 'guessing' when I leave the header field. And 'guessing'
is the wrong word. The target of the exercise was to use handles,
since handles are unique TB hasn't any need to 'guess', it knows.

RG> Once the TO: line had been populated with the full email address, what
RG> did you do to get the second handle in there without destroying the
RG> auto-entered (and already correct) address from the first handle you
RG> typed in?

It looks like you were messing with TB's autocomplete function, when
you type it completes what you might be typing, but what TB
autocompletes is selected. When you're continuing to type matching
characters each one is unselected, as soon as you use another
character TB tries to match with a new address, so when it has got the
right address, you press End Comma Space and continue with the new
address.

RG> I pressed comma, a most natural thing,

Not really

RG> which destroys the auto-entered correct address.

And that's a most natural thing, first you unselect the autocomplete
text.

RG> If you had to make ANY keystrokes at all, why NOT allow the comma?

Because the comma is text. When you've got a contact with the
displayed name as "Doe, John" and you start typing 'doe, ' TB will at
some time autocomplete that with '"Doe, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>'
So the comma is disallowed, because it might be part of the name.

-- 
Groetjes, Roelof

The Bat! 2.13 "Lucky" Beta/5
Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1
1 pop3 account, server on LAN

Disclaimer: Any opinion stated in this message is not necessarily shared by my budgies 
or rabbits.



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Selecting Text - Reply to all

[Roelof Otten]

Hallo Critter,

On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 15:38:40 -0400GMT (14-8-2004, 21:38 +0200, where I
live), you wrote:
C> I know there is a keyboard shortcut F4 to quote selected text in a
C> reply, but I do not see there is one for quoting and replying to all.
C> Is there a way to add a keyboard shortcut or is there one?

Quote and reply to all can be done with 

Quote selected text an reply to all can't be done.

-- 
Groetjes, Roelof

The Bat! 2.13 "Lucky" Beta/5
Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1
1 pop3 account, server on LAN

Disclaimer: Any opinion stated in this message is not necessarily shared by my budgies 
or rabbits.



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Selecting Text - Reply to all

[Costas Papadopoulos]

Hello Critter,
Saturday, August 14, 2004, 10:38:40 PM, you wrote (possibly edited):
> Is there a way to add a keyboard shortcut or is there one?

Shift-Ctrl-F5 => Reply to all

-- 
Best regards,
 Costas



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Panda antivirus plugin

[Alexander S. Kunz]

Hello Claude Renaud,

14-Aug-2004 13:58, you wrote:

> I just did a search on google about the panda antivirus plugin. The only
> plugin I found is the 0.1 test version which seems to work with the
> latest panda antivirus software. Does someone know if a more recent
> version has been realeased ?

I won't be of any help regarding your question (I know though that Panda AV
is a pretty good program)...

I just wonder if it is really necessary to have an antivirus plugin for
(any) email program. AFAIK most of the modern AV programs either watch
incoming traffic on the socket layer and catch (any) virus content, either
by email or malicious websites that way, or they offer at least a local
virus scanning proxy.

I myself am not using either. I even excluded TB's mail directories from
the on-access scanner for performance reasons. The on-demand scanner will
scan TB's mail archive's anyway during my weekly scan. And if I ever should
accidentally choose to save a virus attachment to disk (which is hardly
going to happen since my system is protect by my brain, too), the on-access
scanner will catch the file, then.

Am I missing something or putting myself at larger risk of a virus
infection? Am I just not seeing it?

-- 
Best regards,
 Alexander

Every tomorrow has two handles. We can take hold of it with the handle of
anxiety or the handle of faith. -- H. W. Beecher



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Adress Book vs. Adress Book Groups

[Peter Ballantyne]

I use the address book groups very heavily. It acts as my contact manager and the 
fields for Internet links will link to local files also. I don't let it hide entries 
that are included in a group, so that the default always shows the whole lot. In a 
couple of years I have hammered it and it has never once let me down. Hope this is 
helpful.
-- 
Peter in New Zealand.

Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Address book, using multiple addresses

[Robin Anson]

On Sun 15 August 2004, 5:31:45 +1000, Critter wrote:
> In the address book, you can put additional email addresses, one per
> line, but is there a way to access the second, third email addresses
> while creating a new message w/o having to click on the "To:" and have
> the secondary address to to the BCC field?

Yes, from that "To:" field you can bring up the address book by left
clicking on the word To: or by clicking the address book icon at the far
right of the line. Then right click on the entry in the address book that
has multiple addresses. Entries that have multiple addresses show an
option "Add Address >" between "Add" and "Add All" and this allows you to
select one of the available addresses.

-- 
Robin

Using The Bat! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1







Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: more than just spam/ham classification

[dAniel hAhler]

Hello TBUDL,

on Sun, 15. Aug 2004 at 07:19:14 +0200 Alexander S. Kunz wrote:

>>> I tried Bayesfilter, but somehow it did not learn as fast as BayesIt.
>>> However, I'm using PopFile now and use Virtual Folders to reflect the
>>> bucket classification of PopFile (except for spam, of course).

>> But you cannot reflect real bucket classifications like "German",
>> "English" or similar with that, can you?

> Of course, why not? We discussed that a couple of days/weeks ago. The idea
> is to set color groups for the text classification and upon the color group
> of the message show them in virtual folders (color groups only because they
> can be changed afterwards in thebat, just in case POPfile classified a
> message wrong)

Oh.. I've mis-read your message.
I thought you were using another Bayesian Filter, but you're using
POPFile, too.. :)

>> That's a pretty cool thing so my reply template can react on that.
> Never thought about that... separating german and english, nice idea... :-)

Very useful indeed. And therefor I don't want to miss that feature..


-- 
shinE!
GnuPG/PGP key: http://thequod.de/danielhahler.asc
ICQ#152282665

Lifted with The Bat! 2.12.03 on Windows XP Service Pack 2.



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: more than just spam/ham classification

[Alexander S. Kunz]

Hello dAniel hAhler,

15-Aug-2004 11:55, you wrote:

> I thought you were using another Bayesian Filter, but you're using
> POPFile, too.. :)

I'd vote for integrating something like POPfile into TB, of course. ;-)

-- 
Best regards,
 Alexander

Gumperson's Law: The probability of anything happening is in inverse ratio
to its desirability.



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[Andre Wichartz]

Hello DZ-Jay,

On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:42:17 -0400 GMT [20:42 CEST] you wrote:

DJ> That makes sense.  But do you know how the weight is
DJ> calculated? I can assume it is the product of its initial
DJ> probability by the "regarding threshold" value, is that true?

I don't program the thing. For specific questions you really should ask
Alexey.

DJ> And is it only for tokens that have the same occurrence in spam and
DJ> non-spam messages, or is the weight skewed by this threshold on all
DJ> tokens to give them an extra "non-spamy" umph in order to avoid
DJ> false positives?

I just made an example. It would of course work regardless how often a
word occurs.

-- 
Cheers,
 Andre

"Geh nicht nur die glatten Strassen:
 geh Wege, die vor Dir noch niemand ging,
 damit Du Spuren hinterlässt,und nicht nur Staub."  



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[Andre Wichartz]

Hello MikeD,

On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:47:24 -0500 GMT [21:47 CEST] you wrote:

M> I have been following this thread since I have been having some
M> problems too.  I was using the old version (0.4gm) until I upgraded to
M> the current version of TB.

M> The settings I used to use don't seem to work any more and I either
M> get everything filtered as junk or nothing is filtered as junk.  I
M> trained it with about 2000 spam and 2000 ham messages and still no
M> joy.  I have tried low "threshold" numbers and high with out much
M> difference.

Have you deleted you spam and non-spam dictionary files when you
upgraded?

-- 
Cheers,
 Andre

"I don't suffer from insanity.
 I enjoy every minute of it."  



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[DZ-Jay]

Some time around 08/14/2004 22:24:58, I think I heard MikeD (3) say:
> What settings are you using?  Under the old version (0.4gm) I had it
> trained and was getting most spam caught, no false positives with a
> "Move message" setting of 10.  Now I have gone down as low as 1 and as
> high as 99 without success.

I started with the "move message" setting at 40 and continued to lowered it without 
noticing any effect.  That's when I checked the BAYESIT.LOG file and realized that all 
messages are marked with either 100/99 % or 0% probability, which means that no matter 
how low I set the parameter, it will continue working the same.  I don't understand 
how come there is no "gray area", with messages marked with a, say, 30% probability, 
etc.  I do not get any false positives at all, but I do get about 4%  of false 
negatives...

> BTW, I am using the 0.5.5 verision that came with 2.12.  Should I be
> using the newer version that I saw mentioned?

I was too.  I just upgraded yesterday to 0.5.9 and I haven't noticed a difference.  It 
does provide a white/black list, which I don't care to use because it defeats the 
purpose of a Bayesian filter (there's huge discussion -- more like religious wars -- 
about this on the POPFile list hehe).  Also, the kludges.txt file doesn't seem to be 
implemented either (ignore list for headers).

dZ.

-- 
Powered by The Bat! v.2.12.00,
  Hindered by MS Windows 2000 v.5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[DZ-Jay]

Some time around 08/14/2004 23:28:14, I think I heard Thomas Fernandez say:
DJ>> That makes sense. But do you know how the weight is calculated?

> Check out for a mathematician called Bayes. 19th century, IIRC.

Have you read at all the entire thread, or did you just decided to come in and offer 
your insightful comments at just this point?  I'm talking about the "regarding 
threshold" value and how is it used, i.e. given the bayesian probability of a message 
what *ADDITIONAL* computation occurs with that parameter.  Do you know?  Do you think 
Mr. Bayes would have had enough visionary insight to see how this BayesIt-specific 
parameter was used by Alexey in his plugin?

DJ>> I can assume it is the product of its initial probability by the
DJ>> "regarding threshold" value, is that true?

> It's not that simple.

What is not that simple? The bayesian algorithm or how the "regarding threshold" is 
used by the plugin?  Because, if you have noticed from the context of the comment, I 
am talking about the parameters in the ADVANCED.INI file and how they are implemented.

dZ.

-- 
Powered by The Bat! v.2.12.00,
  Hindered by MS Windows 2000 v.5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[DZ-Jay]

Some time around 08/15/2004 07:43:05, I think I heard Andre Wichartz say:
> Hello DZ-Jay,

> On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:42:17 -0400 GMT [20:42 CEST] you wrote:

DJ>> That makes sense.  But do you know how the weight is
DJ>> calculated? I can assume it is the product of its initial
DJ>> probability by the "regarding threshold" value, is that true?

> I don't program the thing. For specific questions you really should ask
> Alexey.

I thought that with so much traffic in this list there would be someone who knew.  Oh 
well...

DJ>> And is it only for tokens that have the same occurrence in spam and
DJ>> non-spam messages, or is the weight skewed by this threshold on all
DJ>> tokens to give them an extra "non-spamy" umph in order to avoid
DJ>> false positives?

> I just made an example. It would of course work regardless how often a
> word occurs.

So you don't know... Ok.  I'll continue looking for info, probably contacting Alexey.

Thanx
dZ.

-- 
Powered by The Bat! v.2.12.00,
  Hindered by MS Windows 2000 v.5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: Help with BayesIt tuning

[MikeD (3)]

Hello Andre,

Sunday, August 15, 2004, 6:44:17 AM, you wrote:

AW> Hello MikeD,

AW> On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:47:24 -0500 GMT [21:47 CEST] you wrote:

AW> Have you deleted you spam and non-spam dictionary files when you
AW> upgraded?

Funny, that.  When I first upgraded I did not and it seemed to work
fine ... until I rebooted.

After that, yes, I deleted all the dict files I could find.
Apparently there were two sets, one from the old version and one set
from the new.

I then re-trained it on the accumulated spam and ham folders I have
with about 2,000 messages each.  BTW, If I give Bayesit all 2,000
messages at once to "chew on", it would hang.  If I gave it in
"chunks" it seemed to work OK 

-- 
Best regards,
 MikeDmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using The Bat! v2.12.00 on Windows ME 4.90 Build  3000
 



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: Help with BayesIt tuning

[MikeD (3)]

Hello DZ-Jay,

Sunday, August 15, 2004, 8:12:23 AM, you wrote:

DJ> Some time around 08/14/2004 22:24:58, I think I heard MikeD (3) say:
>> What settings are you using?  Under the old version (0.4gm) I had it
>> trained and was getting most spam caught, no false positives with a
>> "Move message" setting of 10.  Now I have gone down as low as 1 and as
>> high as 99 without success.

DJ> I started with the "move message" setting at 40 and continued
DJ> to lowered it without noticing any effect.  That's when I checked
DJ> the BAYESIT.LOG file and realized that all messages are marked
DJ> with either 100/99 % or 0% probability, which means that no matter
DJ> how low I set the parameter, it will continue working the same.  I
DJ> don't understand how come there is no "gray area", with messages
DJ> marked with a, say, 30% probability, etc.  I do not get any false
DJ> positives at all, but I do get about 4%  of false negatives...

At the moment, everything in the log is .99.  Nothing has any other
value.  Does that sound right?

>> BTW, I am using the 0.5.5 verision that came with 2.12.  Should I be
>> using the newer version that I saw mentioned?

DJ> I was too.  I just upgraded yesterday to 0.5.9 and I haven't
DJ> noticed a difference.  It does provide a white/black list, which I
DJ> don't care to use because it defeats the purpose of a Bayesian
DJ> filter (there's huge discussion -- more like religious wars --
DJ> about this on the POPFile list hehe).  Also, the kludges.txt file
DJ> doesn't seem to be implemented either (ignore list for headers).

That's too bad 


-- 
Best regards,
 MikeDmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using The Bat! v2.12.00 on Windows ME 4.90 Build  3000
 



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[Thomas Fernandez]

Hello DZ-Jay,

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 09:20:41 -0400 GMT (15/08/2004, 20:20 +0700 GMT),
DZ-Jay wrote:

DJ>>> That makes sense. But do you know how the weight is calculated?

>> Check out for a mathematician called Bayes. 19th century, IIRC.

DJ> Have you read at all the entire thread, or did you just
DJ> decided to come in and offer your insightful comments at just this
DJ> point?

I 've read the thread, but nowhere was mentioned how a Bayesian filter
works. I thought that was your question. Apparantly it wasn't, so
sorry for having wasted bandwidth.

>> It's not that simple.

DJ> What is not that simple? The bayesian algorithm or how the
DJ> "regarding threshold" is used by the plugin?

The Bayesian algorithms. Your question, to which I answered, could be
understood this way, so I don't feel I have to apologise.

-- 

Regards,
Thomas.

"Sorry, Officer, I didn't realize my radar detector wasn't plugged
in."

Message reply created with The Bat! 2.12.02
under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build  A 





Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[DZ-Jay]

Some time around 08/15/2004 09:28:42, I think I heard Thomas Fernandez say:
DJ>> What is not that simple? The bayesian algorithm or how the
DJ>> "regarding threshold" is used by the plugin?

> The Bayesian algorithms. Your question, to which I answered, could be
> understood this way, so I don't feel I have to apologise.

I guess some people in this list just have to offer an answer -- any answer -- just 
because.

Well then, thank you for your wonderfully insightful answer of "Check out for a 
mathematician called Bayes. 19th century, IIRC."  No need to apologize at all, I have 
such a better grasp on the subject now, thanks!

dZ.

-- 
Powered by The Bat! v.2.12.00,
  Hindered by MS Windows 2000 v.5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[DZ-Jay]

Some time around 08/15/2004 09:24:56, I think I heard MikeD (3) say:
DJ>> I started with the "move message" setting at 40 and continued
DJ>> to lowered it without noticing any effect.  That's when I checked
DJ>> the BAYESIT.LOG file and realized that all messages are marked
DJ>> with either 100/99 % or 0% probability, which means that no matter
DJ>> how low I set the parameter, it will continue working the same.  I
DJ>> don't understand how come there is no "gray area", with messages
DJ>> marked with a, say, 30% probability, etc.  I do not get any false
DJ>> positives at all, but I do get about 4%  of false negatives...

> At the moment, everything in the log is .99.  Nothing has any other
> value.  Does that sound right?

That's more or less what I get, and in my opinion, it doesn't seem to be right.

However, I recently noticed why some obviously spam messages are given a probability 
of 0%:  Apparently the analysis engine is regarding a few "empty" tokens with a value 
of 0%, which "unspamifies" the final value, for example, in my log file, I get this in 
some messages:

: ---
15.08.2004 08:13:41 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Graham:  0
Spam-grade:  0
Value for The Bat!: 0
: ---

<...>
:  0
:  0
:  0
:  0
:  0
:  0
:  0
:  0

As you can see, no matter how many spam tokens are found, all those 0's will end up 
clearing the final probability value.  This seems to me a bug in the tokenizer.  I 
haven't been able to find a common denominator for messages that cause this.

Does anybody else get "empty" tokens in their log files?

dZ.

-- 
Powered by The Bat! v.2.12.00,
  Hindered by MS Windows 2000 v.5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[DZ-Jay]

Some time around 08/15/2004 09:23:46, I think I heard MikeD (3) say:
> Hello Andre,

> Sunday, August 15, 2004, 6:44:17 AM, you wrote:

AW>> Have you deleted you spam and non-spam dictionary files when you
AW>> upgraded?

> Funny, that.  When I first upgraded I did not and it seemed to work
> fine ... until I rebooted.

Strange... rebooting shouldn't affect anything...

> After that, yes, I deleted all the dict files I could find.
> Apparently there were two sets, one from the old version and one set
> from the new.

I had to do the same thing when upgrading from v0.4gm to v0.5.4 because I was having 
problems.

> I then re-trained it on the accumulated spam and ham folders I have
> with about 2,000 messages each.  BTW, If I give Bayesit all 2,000
> messages at once to "chew on", it would hang.  If I gave it in
> "chunks" it seemed to work OK 

Hum... after deleting the dict files, I trained normally with lots of spam/non-spam 
messages (I'm pretty sure it was more than 2,000) without a problem.  So I don't know 
what could have happened in your case (?)

I personally find BayesIt extremely powerful, accurate, and fast (I come from POPFile, 
with an accuracy of 99.6 % which required a LOT of manual tuning, had quite some false 
positives, and was VERY slow...), but what it misses it *really* misses (0%, as 
opposed to some mid-way value).

dZ.

-- 
Powered by The Bat! v.2.12.00,
  Hindered by MS Windows 2000 v.5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[Alexander S. Kunz]

Hello DZ-Jay,

15-Aug-2004 15:12, you wrote:

> I checked the BAYESIT.LOG file and realized that all messages are
> marked with either 100/99 % or 0% probability, which means that no matter
> how low I set the parameter, it will continue working the same.  I don't
> understand how come there is no "gray area", with messages marked with a,
> say, 30% probability, etc.  I do not get any false positives at all, but
> I do get about 4%  of false negatives...

I just checked my POPfile bucket pages and found it very interesting that,
despite spam is only 5.8% of my messages (lucky me, hu?), the "distinct
word count" for those spam messages is by far the highest (only messages
marked as "genuine/english" come close). I'd interpret that as "spam is
*very* recognizable" after a certain training period. That could explain
your results with BayesIt - maybe.

In practice, I had similar (odd) results with BayesIt. :-) ...part of the
reason that made me switch to POPfile...

-- 
Best regards,
 Alexander

Bradley's Bromide: If computers get too powerful, we can organize them into
a committee... that will do them in.



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[DZ-Jay]

Some time around 08/15/2004 10:20:47, I think I heard Alexander S. Kunz say:
> I just checked my POPfile bucket pages and found it very interesting that,
> despite spam is only 5.8% of my messages (lucky me, hu?), the "distinct
> word count" for those spam messages is by far the highest (only messages
> marked as "genuine/english" come close). I'd interpret that as "spam is
> *very* recognizable" after a certain training period. That could explain
> your results with BayesIt - maybe.


Yes, I agree that that could be the reason.  However, the messages that are missed 
(roughly 4% of total spam traffic) are marked with a 0%, which would qualify them as 
"unambiguosly genuine (non-spam)", but they obviously are not, as a lot of spam tokens 
are found in them.  This is why I think there might be a problem with the filter 
itself, or with my settings.

> In practice, I had similar (odd) results with BayesIt. :-) ...part of the
> reason that made me switch to POPfile...

Funny, I went the other way... POPfile was very reliable for me (99.6%) but required 
constant manual hacking of the corpus to maintain this accuracy, plus with a 
sufficiently high corpus, it was really slow (took almost a couple of seconds to 
download each message, even very small ones), which with a dial-up connection and 
hundreds of messages a day is almost unbearable.

Plus, there was no way to offer some extra weight to non-spam messages (like with 
"regarding threshold" in BayesIt), which almost completely irradicates false 
positives.  With POPfile I had to scan my spam box once in a while in order to make 
sure.  With BayesIt, after doing so for a few months without even a single false 
positive, I concluded that it was not necessary anymore to scan the spam folder often. 
 I like that :)

dZ.

-- 
Powered by The Bat! v.2.12.00,
  Hindered by MS Windows 2000 v.5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Panda antivirus plugin

[Allie Martin]

Alexander S. Kunz, [ASK] wrote:

> I just wonder if it is really necessary to have an antivirus plugin for
> (any) email program.

I wouldn't say that it's absolutely necessary because once a realtime,
system scanner is running, the infected attachment will be detected
before you run it or save it to disk.

However, you may wish for more than mere detection at that stage of
the acquisition of the infected message.

The plugin allows you to do various things with the infected message.
- you can have it deleted upon receipt.
- you can have the attachment removed/cured upon receipt.
- you can have a block of text added to the infected message body
stating that it's infected and with which virus/trojan/worms.
- you can have the infected message nicely slotted into a quarantine
folder.
- it can allow for dual protection. Accessing one anti-virus programs
monitoring for e-mail via the plug-in and using the system scanner
with the other anti-virus plug-in.

Your mileage may vary on what you wish or find not worthwhile enough
to motivate you into wanting to use a plugin.

For me, being able to use the plug-in is a plus, though not a
show-stopper. I don't currently use one. However, while using one (at
the time it was the DrWeb plugin), I enjoyed being able to have the
infected messages auto-quaratined to a special quarantine folder. I
also liked being able to easily find out what virus/trojan/worms
lurked in the attachments through the text block added at the top of
the infected message body.

The current challenge with using a plug-in is that they often don't
work from TB! version to TB! version, and they often don't work across
anti-virus versions. Each time DrWeb released an upgrade, it broke the
plug-in and you'd have to wait for a new one to be released. The same
for NOD32.

-- 
Allie Martin [List Moderator and fellow end-user]
 The Bat!™ v2.12.03 on WinXP Pro (SP2)

. ...put knot yore trust inn spel chequers.
  


pgpvvxdf6oTsW.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: Help with BayesIt tuning

[Pete Holsberg]

Sunday, August 15, 2004, 7:44:17 AM, you wrote:

AW> Hello MikeD,

AW> On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:47:24 -0500 GMT [21:47 CEST] you wrote:

AW> Have you deleted you spam and non-spam dictionary files when you
AW> upgraded?

What are their names and where are they?


-- 



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

NOD32 plugin (was: Re[2]: Panda antivirus plugin)

[Marek Mikus]

Hello all,
Sunday, August 15, 2004, Allie Martin wrote:

> The current challenge with using a plug-in is that they often don't
> work from TB! version to TB! version, and they often don't work across
> anti-virus versions. Each time DrWeb released an upgrade, it broke the
> plug-in and you'd have to wait for a new one to be released. The same
> for NOD32.

did  You  tested  first  beta  version  of plugin for NOD32 v2? It was
created  by  Maxim  some  weeks ago and works with last beta of NOD32,
which  has  file  nod32api.dll  included. We have found only one issue
yet,  system must be restarted after installing beta of NOD and adding
plugin to TB.

Plugin can be downloaded here:
http://www.thebat.cz/stazeni/beta/nod32.rar (50kB)

NOD32 beta is here:
http://www.eset.sk/down/downbeta.htm

-- 

Bye

Marek Mikus
Czech support of The Bat!
http://www.thebat.cz

Using the best The Bat! 2.13 "Lucky" Beta/5
under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1
Notebook Acer, Pentium4-M 2.2 GHz, 512 MB RAM, ADSL line

 



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[DZ-Jay]

Some time around 08/15/2004 10:52:14, I think I heard Pete Holsberg say:
> Sunday, August 15, 2004, 7:44:17 AM, you wrote:

AW>> Hello MikeD,

AW>> On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:47:24 -0500 GMT [21:47 CEST] you wrote:

AW>> Have you deleted you spam and non-spam dictionary files when you
AW>> upgraded?

> What are their names and where are they?

Their names are spamdict.* and nspamdict.* and they are located in a directory called 
"base" within the BayesIt working directory, which is normally either:

\BayesIt\base
or
\MAIL\BayesIt\base

dZ.



-- 
Powered by The Bat! v.2.12.00,
  Hindered by MS Windows 2000 v.5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[DZ-Jay]

Some time around 08/15/2004 09:24:56, I think I heard MikeD (3) say:
DJ>> I was too.  I just upgraded yesterday to 0.5.9 and I haven't
DJ>> noticed a difference.  It does provide a white/black list, which I
DJ>> don't care to use because it defeats the purpose of a Bayesian
DJ>> filter (there's huge discussion -- more like religious wars --
DJ>> about this on the POPFile list hehe).  Also, the kludges.txt file
DJ>> doesn't seem to be implemented either (ignore list for headers).

> That's too bad 

I just learned (by re-reading a babelfished translation of the russian BayesIt page) 
that the "kludges" file (whitelist of kludges) does seem to work, except I 
misunderstood it.  I thought it worked like POPFile's "ignore" list, which ignores the 
specified tokens when computing the probability of a message.  But it is not a list of 
just "tokens", it is a list of header names that will be ignored, for example, if you 
put in the list:

message-id
x-mailer
subject

If will ignore the values of headers that start with those strings.  This is very 
useful, though.

I wonder, is the "ignore" list in the black/white list rules window what I confused 
the kludges list for? i.e. is it akin to the POPFile ignore list?  Anybody know?

dZ.

-- 
Powered by The Bat! v.2.12.00,
  Hindered by MS Windows 2000 v.5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: Help with BayesIt tuning

[Stuart Cuddy]

Hello DZ-Jay,
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 9:25:14 AM, you wrote:

DJ> However, I recently noticed why some obviously spam messages
DJ> are given a probability of 0%:  Apparently the analysis engine is
DJ> regarding a few "empty" tokens with a value of 0%, which
DJ> "unspamifies" the final value, for example, in my log file, I get
DJ> this in some messages:

I am not seeing the "empty" tokens, but the following message is being
   received without being caught. I sent it again to myself about 5 or
   6 times and marked it as junk each time. The values do not seem to
   change at all.

   What is Graham?
   What is Spam-grade?
   

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Graham:  7.59688e-029
Spam-grade:  7.59688e-029
Value for The Bat!: 0
: ---
biz:  0.01
--:  0.0212766
size:  0.01
Advance:  0.01
H this:  0.058463
partners:  0.01
Today:  0.01
H PLease:  0.01
H de:  0.0359281
Career:  0.01
text:  0.01
experience:  0.0133407
aol:  0.01
Verdana:  0.01
past:  0.01

-- 
 Stuartmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using The Bat! v2.13 "Lucky" Beta/5 on Windows 98 4.10 Build   A 



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

More than 1 AV Plugin at the same time ?

[WilWilWil]

Hello,

As SO ask for using 2 plugins at the same time for blocking spam, is it possible
for  anti  virus  plugins  ?  Because my Grisoft plugin (not free version 6, but
registered version 7) sometimes doesn't see viruses within archives !

Any Suggestion for the 2nd plugin if I can use 2 model ?

Thanks

-- 
WilWilWil (France)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

TB 2.12.00
Windows XP
Service Pack 1



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Monaco TTF Police ?

[WilWilWil]

Hello,

I've seen in a previous subject that SO spoke about monaco.ttf ? I can't find this
subject again in archive... SO can remember me the link for get this police ?

Thanks,

-- 
WilWilWil (France)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

TB 2.12.00
Windows XP
Service Pack 1



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Monaco TTF Police ?

[Alexander S. Kunz]

Hello WilWilWil,

15-Aug-2004 17:26, you wrote:

> I've seen in a previous subject that SO spoke about monaco.ttf ? I can't find this
> subject again in archive... SO can remember me the link for get this police ?

Police? ...anyway... :-)

http://www.pa.msu.edu/ftp/pub/misc/tek-phaser/ttfonts/MONACO.TTF

-- 
Best regards,
 Alexander

Politicians should read science fiction, not westerns and detective
stories. -- Arthur C. Clarke



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[DZ-Jay]

Some time around 08/15/2004 11:13:49, I think I heard Stuart Cuddy say:

>What is Graham?
>What is Spam-grade?

AFAIK, spam-grade would be the probability of it being spam, and Graham, I suppose, 
means the probability of it being not-spam (I suppose, non-spam-grade > ham-grade > 
graham ?)

But in my log I see exactly what you see in yours: that the graham and spam-grade 
values are identical in every case.  This keeps getting fishier and fishier...

dZ.

-- 
Powered by The Bat! v.2.12.00,
  Hindered by MS Windows 2000 v.5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Monaco TTF Police ? ->Fonts

[WilWilWil]

==Original message text===
From: WilWilWil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sunday, August 15, 2004, 5:26:00 PM
Subject: Monaco TTF Police ?
W> Hello,

W> I've seen in a previous subject that SO spoke about monaco.ttf ? I can't find this
W> subject again in archive... SO can remember me the link for get this police ?

W> Thanks,


===End of original message text===
Excuse me for confusion : I wanted to speak about Fonts (police in french)...
-- 
WilWilWil
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

TB 2.12.00
Windows XP
Service Pack 1



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[DZ-Jay]

Some time around 08/15/2004 11:13:49, I think I heard Stuart Cuddy say:
> I am not seeing the "empty" tokens, but the following message is being
>received without being caught. I sent it again to myself about 5 or
>6 times and marked it as junk each time. The values do not seem to
>change at all.

Maybe this is because of your value in the "recalculating strategy" parameter, which 
governs how often automatic "retraining" is done.  Try lowering this value and 
re-marking the message as spam and see if the values change.

dZ.

-- 
Powered by The Bat! v.2.12.00,
  Hindered by MS Windows 2000 v.5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

adding all addresses in AB

[pk roy]

hello,

how to all address (to/cc/bcc) including sender's
to address book ?

any suggestions !

pk roy

--

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
;-)
TB v2.12.0 / W2K SP4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: Help with BayesIt tuning

[Pete Holsberg]

Sunday, August 15, 2004, 11:11:00 AM, you wrote:

DJ> Some time around 08/15/2004 10:52:14, I think I heard Pete Holsberg say:
>> Sunday, August 15, 2004, 7:44:17 AM, you wrote:

AW>>> Hello MikeD,

AW>>> On 14 Aug 2004 at 14:47:24 -0500 GMT [21:47 CEST] you wrote:

AW>>> Have you deleted you spam and non-spam dictionary files when you
AW>>> upgraded?

>> What are their names and where are they?

DJ> Their names are spamdict.* and nspamdict.* and they are located in a directory
DJ> called "base" within the BayesIt working directory, which is normally either:

DJ> \BayesIt\base
DJ> or
DJ> \MAIL\BayesIt\base


??? Mine are in C:\Documents and Settings\pjh\Application Data\BayesIt\base

TB is in C:\Program Files\The Bat!\thebat.exe and BayesIt is in C:\Program 
Files\BayesIt
under Windows 2000.

Is this significant?

-- 



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[DZ-Jay]

Some time around 08/15/2004 11:57:15, I think I heard Pete Holsberg say:
> Sunday, August 15, 2004, 11:11:00 AM, you wrote:

DJ>> Some time around 08/15/2004 10:52:14, I think I heard Pete Holsberg say:

DJ>>\BayesIt\base
DJ>> or
DJ>>\MAIL\BayesIt\base


> ??? Mine are in C:\Documents and Settings\pjh\Application Data\BayesIt\base

> TB is in C:\Program Files\The Bat!\thebat.exe and BayesIt is in C:\Program 
> Files\BayesIt
> under Windows 2000.

Well, I guess those are the default installation paths:  The application in the 
Program Files directory and the BayesIt files in your profile directory.  Since I have 
TB! installed in a non-standard directory (i.e. outside the Program Files directory), 
BayesIt was installed within that directory.  I guess then I should have said:

\BayesIt\base
or
\BayesIt\base

Sorry about that.  I guess that since I don't use the default installation paths I 
don't know where things normally fall.

In any case, the dict files fall within the BayesIt working directory, which is 
specified in BayesIt options window.

> Is this significant?

Not at all.

dZ.

-- 
Powered by The Bat! v.2.12.00,
  Hindered by MS Windows 2000 v.5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: adding all addresses in AB

[Stuart Cuddy]

Hello pk,
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 10:58:56 AM, you wrote:

pr> how to all address (to/cc/bcc) including sender's
pr> to address book ?

pr> any suggestions !

You can right click on the appropriate header in the Header bar and
select Add to address book. I believe it then gives you the option to
add all other recipients to same address book. I'm not sure if this
will automatically add CC or not. I'm thinking it will not let you do
BCC as you do not know who those people are.


-- 
 Stuartmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using The Bat! v2.13 "Lucky" Beta/5 on Windows 98 4.10 Build   A 



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[2]: adding all addresses in AB

[pk roy]

Hello Stuart,



pr>> how to all address (to/cc/bcc) including sender's
pr>> to address book ?

pr>> any suggestions !

> You can right click on the appropriate header in the Header bar and
> select Add to address book. I believe it then gives you the option to
> add all other recipients to same address book. I'm not sure if this
> will automatically add CC or not. I'm thinking it will not let you do
> BCC as you do not know who those people are.

this is one way.. a simplistic way..
but i wanted,  something automatic, that is the moment mail is sent /received
all addresses added (rather sync.) to AB


pk roy
---
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

using TB! v2.12.0 W2K SP4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re[3]: adding all addresses in AB

[Stuart Cuddy]

Hello pk,
Sunday, August 15, 2004, 11:20:02 AM, you wrote:

pr>>> how to all address (to/cc/bcc) including sender's
pr>>> to address book ?

pr>>> any suggestions !

>> You can right click on the appropriate header in the Header bar and
>> select Add to address book. I believe it then gives you the option to
>> add all other recipients to same address book. I'm not sure if this
>> will automatically add CC or not. I'm thinking it will not let you do
>> BCC as you do not know who those people are.

pr> this is one way.. a simplistic way..
pr> but i wanted,  something automatic, that is the moment mail is sent /received
pr> all addresses added (rather sync.) to AB


You can do this through the filtering system, I believe. There is a
whole group of options to select from.

-- 
Best regards,
 Stuartmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using The Bat! v2.12 Beta/7 on Windows 2000 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[George Mitchell]

DZ-Jay wrote:

DJ> Some time around 08/15/2004 11:13:49, I think I heard Stuart Cuddy say:

>>What is Graham?
>>What is Spam-grade?

DJ> AFAIK, spam-grade would be the probability of it being spam, and
DJ> Graham, I suppose, means the probability of it being not-spam (I
DJ> suppose, non-spam-grade > ham-grade > graham ?)

It might be coincidence, but Paul Graham has written much about
Bayesian filtering.  I'd guess it has something to do with his
methodology.  Even if I'm wrong, there's some interesting reading at:

http://www.paulgraham.com/antispam.html

-- 
George

Using The Bat! 2.12.00 on Windows XP Pro 5.1, Build 2600, Service Pack 1.



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: More than 1 AV Plugin at the same time ?

[Peter Meyns]

Hi WilWilWil,

on Sun, 15 Aug 2004 17:24:06 +0200GMT, you wrote:

W> As SO ask for using 2 plugins at the same time for blocking spam, is it possible
W> for  anti  virus  plugins  ?  Because my Grisoft plugin (not free version 6, but
W> registered version 7) sometimes doesn't see viruses within archives !

W> Any Suggestion for the 2nd plugin if I can use 2 model ?

You should not run two virus scanners at the same time. They are very
likely to disturb each other. At least that is what I learned. :-)

-- 
Cheers
Peter

The irony of life is that no one gets out alive...

Winamp currently playing: N.E.R.D - Maybe (#Musik.Main - www.RauteMusik.de - powered 
by www.gSp.biz)



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: NOD32 plugin (was: Re[2]: Panda antivirus plugin)

[Allie Martin]

Marek Mikus, [MM] wrote:

> did You tested first beta version of plugin for NOD32 v2? It was
> created by Maxim some weeks ago and works with last beta of NOD32,
> which has file nod32api.dll included. We have found only one issue
> yet, system must be restarted after installing beta of NOD and
> adding plugin to TB.

I've noted the availability and have not been interested. I'm not
pleased with NOD32's support (I've never had them respond to any of my
queries), hence I'll not be trying any of their betas and will likely
not renew my subscription since I'm having some problems with the IMON
module.

-- 
Allie Martin [List Moderator and fellow end-user]
 The Bat!™ v2.12.03 on WinXP Pro (SP2)

. Don't believe everything you hear or anything you say.
  


pgpzP6WXLJHhP.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: More than 1 AV Plugin at the same time ?

[Allie Martin]

Peter Meyns, [PM] wrote:

> You should not run two virus scanners at the same time. They are very
> likely to disturb each other. At least that is what I learned. :-)

Since the plugin interface will determine how each antivirus checks
the incoming message, using 2 may actually be possible. I'm really not
sure about this.

However, you're correct in that it's definitely not a good idea to
have two antivirus programs doing system monitoring concurrently. This
will likely lead to conflicts, errors and consequent stability
problems.

-- 
Allie Martin [List Moderator and fellow end-user]
 The Bat!™ v2.12.03 on WinXP Pro (SP2)

. Ok, I pulled the pin. Now what? Where are you going?
  


pgpvTMSv4GHlJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: adding all addresses in AB

[Greg Strong]

Hello Stuart,

Sunday, August 15, 2004, 11:28:50 AM, Stuart Cuddy wrote:

pr how to all address (to/cc/bcc) including sender's
pr to address book ?

... 

>>> You can right click on the appropriate header in the Header bar and
>>> select Add to address book.

... 

pr>> this is one way.. a simplistic way..
pr>> but i wanted,  something automatic, that is the moment mail is sent /received
pr>> all addresses added (rather sync.) to AB


SC> You can do this through the filtering system, I believe. There is a
SC> whole group of options to select from.

Yes I believe in "Sorting Office" for incoming set up a filter and on
the "Actions" tab select "Add address(es) to Address Book" and choose
group if appropriate. Do the same for outgoing mail.  I haven't tried it
though, so I can't speak to the complexities.

-- 
Best Regards,
Greg Strong 

Using The Bat! v2.13 "Lucky" Beta/5 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1




Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Help with BayesIt tuning

[DZ-Jay]

Some time around 08/15/2004 12:35:29, I think I heard George Mitchell say:
> It might be coincidence, but Paul Graham has written much about
> Bayesian filtering.  I'd guess it has something to do with his
> methodology.  Even if I'm wrong, there's some interesting reading at:

> http://www.paulgraham.com/antispam.html

Thanx for the info... that would make more sense, although how come the spam-grade and 
graham values coinside in all messages without exception?  I guess I'll ask Alexey 
about it.  In the meantime, I'll check out the link you sent :)

dZ.

-- 
Powered by The Bat! v.2.12.00,
  Hindered by MS Windows 2000 v.5.0 build 2195 Service Pack 4



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: adding all addresses in AB

[Roelof Otten]

Hallo pk,

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 21:28:56 +0530GMT (15-8-2004, 17:58 +0200, where I
live), you wrote:

PR> how to all address (to/cc/bcc) including sender's
PR> to address book ?

Incoming filter
'Rule' tab
  String: .
  Location: Kludges
  Present: Yes
'Advanced' tab
  Check 'Addresses must not be in Address Book'
Item: Sender
'Actions' tab
  Check 'Add address(es) to Address Book'
Item: Sender (From)

This will take care of adding new contacts to your address book, when
they're sending you mail. Note that TB will add a new entry for
contacts who already are in your AB when they're using a different
name/handle.
When I'm in your AB as "Roelof Otten"  and I'm sending mail
as "Roelof"  thus messing up AB templates you might have.
That's why I added the condition 'Sender not in AB', because that
checks whether the address is in the AB.

However the same (checking whether they're in your AB) can't be done
for recipients, since there are multiple recipients possible.
However, the people you're writing to are most likely already in your
AB, so you don't have to add them.
As far as other recipients for incoming mail are concerned, when you'd
add those you're bound to end up with lots of addresses of people you
don't know. So I'd be careful with adding those automatically.

-- 
Groetjes, Roelof

The Bat! 2.13 "Lucky" Beta/5
Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1
1 pop3 account, server on LAN

Disclaimer: Any opinion stated in this message is not necessarily shared by my budgies 
or rabbits.



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Attachments in sent folder?

[Darrin Rich]

Hello,

  I was looking through my sent folder and noticed that my emails with
  image attachments showed the name of the attachment and the type but
  the size reads as 0 bytes and cant be opened. Is this normal?
 
-- 
Darrin
WinXP Home Service Pack 1
Tbat! 2.12.00

"This message transmitted on 100% recycled electrons." 


pgp07B4rqhrWs.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Attachments in sent folder?

[Mary Bull]

Hello Darrin!

On Sunday, August 15, 2004, 5:29 PM, you wrote:

DR>   I was looking through my sent folder and noticed that my emails with
DR>   image attachments showed the name of the attachment and the type but
DR>   the size reads as 0 bytes and cant be opened. Is this normal?
 
Not here. The last attachment I sent (just today), a small jpeg to my
sister, says under the icon when I pass my cursor over it, in the sent
mail, the name of the file and its size, 63,165 bytes.

-- 
Best regards,
Mary
The Bat! 2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 1







Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Attachments in sent folder?

[Darrin Rich]

On 8/15/2004 5:09 PM my time, Mary wrote:
MB> Not here. The last attachment I sent (just today), a small jpeg to my
MB> sister, says under the icon when I pass my cursor over it, in the sent
MB> mail, the name of the file and its size, 63,165 bytes.


Hi Mary,
  Thanks for looking into it. Ill have to go through my options and
  see if its anything I did.

 
-- 
Darrin
WinXP Home Service Pack 1
Tbat! 2.12.00

"C:\BELFRY is where I keep my .BAT files." 


pgpq3bH5hvaqj.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Save sent messages in same folders as originals

[Critter]

is that a possibility?

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-[ Ctz Consulting ]-=
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-[ http://ctzconsulting.com ]-=


Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Save sent messages in same folders as originals

[Richard Wakeford]

Hello Critter,

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 you wrote in 

C> is that a possibility?

Would "Filter\Actions\save copy in another folder" work. Not tried it
but just an idea.

-- 
Regards,
Richard

| Using The Bat! 2.12.03 & SpamPal
| Windows XP (build 2600), version 5.1 Service Pack 1















   



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html

Re: Attachments in sent folder?

[Roelof Otten]

Hallo Darrin,

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 15:29:20 -0700GMT (16-8-2004, 0:29 +0200, where I
live), you wrote:

DR>   I was looking through my sent folder and noticed that my emails with
DR>   image attachments showed the name of the attachment and the type but
DR>   the size reads as 0 bytes and cant be opened. Is this normal?

Not here, with a pop3 account and attachments stored in the message
body.

-- 
Groetjes, Roelof

The Bat! 2.13 "Lucky" Beta/5
Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1
1 pop3 account, server on LAN

Disclaimer: Any opinion stated in this message is not necessarily shared by my budgies 
or rabbits.



Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html