I'm sorry, but I don't think any type of web page based message system
would be as functional as the list. We can scan and delete if we like
right now; and there *are* options to downloading all the mail before
scanning.
A number of sites for e-mail which are Arachne friendly have been
mentioned
Hi Clarence,
You got me by "OO". OUCH
Eric
Someone wrote (just playing it safe):
>
>Eric S. Emerson wrote:
>>
>> Clarence Verge wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >Regards,
>> >
>> >Sam Heywood
>
>It's ok by me Eric, I've done it once or twice too.
>
>- Clarence Verge
--
Eric S. Emerson wrote:
>
> Clarence Verge wrote:
> >
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Sam Heywood
It's ok by me Eric, I've done it once or twice too.
- Clarence Verge
--
- Help stamp out FATWARE. As a start visit: http://home.arachne.cz/
--
5:05 +0200
>X-Authentication-Warning: ns.arachne.cz: mail set sender to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f
>Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 03:58:34 -0400 (EDT)
>Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: "Thomas Mueller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re:
SMTP id DAA07508;
> Fri, 11 Aug 2000 03:58:34 -0400 (EDT)
>Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 03:58:34 -0400 (EDT)
>Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From: "Thomas Mueller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: eMail (OT liist mail)
>MIME-V
Thomas Mueller wrote:
>>BCC = Blind Carbon Copy
Recipient of BCC doesn't know about the main recipient, unlike CC, where
recipient can see who the main recipient is. I am sending this to Arachne
list
with BCC to Eric S. Emerson. Let me know how/if this demo works.<<
Why wouldn't you want the
BCC = Blind Carbon Copy
Recipient of BCC doesn't know about the main recipient, unlike CC, where
recipient can see who the main recipient is. I am sending this to Arachne list
with BCC to Eric S. Emerson. Let me know how/if this demo works.
Hi Clarence,
After your kind reply I went and checked
the email services on Detroit Freenet. It seems I'm
not using PINE for email but Freeport Mail. PINE is an
option that I haven't used. I glossed thru PINE info
but still haven't run across BCC anywhere so I appreciate
the list hel
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 14:08:04 -0400 (EDT), [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Eric S. Emerson) wrote:
> Hi Jake,
> Thanks for the info. I knew there was a way to
> not show full mail list but I don't use Win programs
> except when my groin starts to ache(in other words as last
> resort). Therefore, I never us
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 02:14:52 -0400 (EDT), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric S. Emerson)
wrote:
> Hi Glenn,
> What does BCC: stand for or mean? Why would
> one use it instead of Cc: ? Does it matter if one uses
> Bcc: or BCC: / CC: or Cc: ?
> Thanks for the help,
BCC is Blind Carbon Copy.
The me
On 10 Aug 00 at 18:22, Arachne4Dos wrote:
>>Incidentally, this is Poco which is an e-mailer running under
>>Winblows but in 2.04M which is pretty good for a wingarbage program.
Another good thrifty Winblows email program is FoxMail. I think it
needs less than 1 meg HD space for the basic progr
Hi Mel,
I noticed your webpage before. My dad's lady
friend's parents were from Scotland and she has a lot
of relatives there that she writes to. However, I can't
get her to use the computer I loaned them. I'll check
out your website.
Eric
Mel Evans wrote:
>>Eric Emerson wrote:
>>
Hi Jake,
Thanks for the info. I knew there was a way to
not show full mail list but I don't use Win programs
except when my groin starts to ache(in other words as last
resort). Therefore, I never used/saw BCC. I use the freenet
Pine mailer for most of my e-mail and I have never seen
m
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 02:14:52 -0400 (EDT), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Hi Glenn,
> What does BCC: stand for or mean? Why would
>one use it instead of Cc: ? Does it matter if one uses
>Bcc: or BCC: / CC: or Cc: ?
>
>snip
In my case, BCC stands for the British Caravanners Club and I am the
area
Hi Glenn,
What does BCC: stand for or mean? Why would
one use it instead of Cc: ? Does it matter if one uses
Bcc: or BCC: / CC: or Cc: ?
Thanks for the help,
Eric
Glenn McCorkle wrote:
>We have now confirmed that v1.6* will only send to the first address on
>any of these lines
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 00:22:22 +1000, Ben Hood wrote:
> On 8 Aug 2000, at 16:59, Pete wrote:
>> For example... A web page displaying all topics less than
>> [user input] days old. Checkboxes next to each displayed topic. Check
>> the desired ones and hit enter. A script could then generate a str
On Tue, 8 Aug 2000 21:51:02 +0200 (MET DST), Bernie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> if three people can't keep things on
> topic there's no wonder there's sometimes very much OT material on the
> mailinglists. Hmm... perhaps I'm worse, I always tend to go OT in some way
> - this is OT isn't it? ;-)
On Wed, 09 Aug 2000 01:25:40 -0500, Samuel W. Heywood wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2000 19:23:05, Dale Mentzer wrote:
>> I mostly enjoy
>> the freewheeling nature of this list. I think it contributes to our
>> sense of community, something I don't get on a moderated list.
> Hello Arachnids:
> For th
Hi All,
I was on a list started by Mike Wendlen, alias
"PC MIKE", the host of a local computer radio show. I
found it very informative, but the host found that
moderating it was too much work. After several "jerks"
posted inappropriate mail, the list died. It was replaced
by a web page w
On 9 Aug 00 at 1:25, Samuel W. Heywood wrote:
>>For the benefit of those who are not aware, this is a moderated list.
>>I remember an incident that occurred a couple of years ago in which
>>the list moderator kicked a subscriber off the list. The offender had
>>become involved in a flame war wi
I think Sam must have been talking about something other than this
mailing list.
And, AFAIK, your definition of "moderated list"" is correct, Ben. I
belonged to one once, and quit rather quickly because nothing got sent
that was meaningful ... all meat had been "moderated out" and there was
noth
Hello Hoody:
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 00:22:22 +1000, you wrote:
> On 9 Aug 2000, at 1:25, Samuel W. Heywood wrote:
>> For the benefit of those who are not aware, this is a moderated list.
> Isn't a moderated list one that every single message that gets sent
> to it goes to a moderator who then dec
On 8 Aug 2000, at 16:59, Pete wrote:
> For example... A web page displaying all topics less than
> [user input] days old. Checkboxes next to each displayed topic. Check
> the desired ones and hit enter. A script could then generate a streamlined
> download... Rather than 30-40 e-mails a day,
On 9 Aug 2000, at 1:25, Samuel W. Heywood wrote:
> For the benefit of those who are not aware, this is a moderated list.
Isn't a moderated list one that every single message that gets sent
to it goes to a moderator who then decides whether or not to let it
go to the rest of the group?
> I rem
On Tue, 8 Aug 2000 19:23:05, Dale Mentzer wrote:
> I mostly enjoy
> the freewheeling nature of this list. I think it contributes to our
> sense of community, something I don't get on a moderated list.
Hello Arachnids:
For the benefit of those who are not aware, this is a moderated list.
I remem
On Tue, 8 Aug 2000 19:23:05, Dale Mentzer wrote:
> Logic: The art of being wrong with confidence.
"Logc would ndcate a speedy retreat Capta n" g>
And also that several eys seem to have stopped worng :-
gotta laugh or I'll cry!
- Pete Randolph -
On 8 Aug 00 at 18:40, Clarence Verge wrote:
>>I find very few messages hit MY Trash without at least a skim.
>>Excepting SPAM. '-)
I agree Clarence. I probably spend less than 10 seconds each on the
messages I am not interested in. Then they're gone. I mostly enjoy
the freewheeling nature of
Pete wrote:
>
> For myself (and others?) the list is a big message board. Scan the
> Inbox and view the topics of interest and trash the others. Perhaps for
> many purposes a MessBoard would be better?
> Though some do have trouble with the web, I believe the interface, if
> properly designed
Pete wrote:
> I have tossed this up on AVA, and would like input from other users
>of the list...
(snip)
But how will we reply? It helps me extremly little if I have a big file
containing all the messages if I then need to be on-line or cut and paste.
On-line time costs money here (well not June
On Tue, 8 Aug 2000 21:51:02 +0200 (MET DST), Bernie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> if three people can't keep things on
> topic there's no wonder there's sometimes very much OT material on the
> mailinglists. Hmm... perhaps I'm worse, I always tend to go OT in some way
> - this is OT isn't it? ;-)
30 matches
Mail list logo
