Hello Dwight,
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 23:56:04 -0600 GMT (04/01/2008, 12:56 +0700 GMT),
Dwight Corrin wrote:
Because Gmail doesn't send your messages back to you when you send
them to a mailing list. You need to use outgoing filters to see your
contributions in your list folder.
DC That explains
Hello Henk,
On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 08:23:05 +0100 GMT (04/01/2008, 14:23 +0700 GMT),
Henk M. de Bruijn wrote:
HMdB I added a note because I have some dozen of private
HMdB maps/folders, not mailinglists. In which the relevant messages
HMdB arrive and theirs answers. I supported this wish first
Hallo Thomas,
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 09:03:19 +0700GMT (3-1-2008, 3:03 +0100, where I
live), you wrote:
RO Ouch! I'd go crazy when all filters were thrown in one group.
TF You don't need to do that.
snip
TF You can still have them seperated, nobody forces you to use them for
TF both Incoming and
Hello Thomas,
M I'm sure many of us have a number of filters checking on From: in
M Incoming filters and on To: in Outgoing, and having a single filter
M for Incoming and Outgoing and filtering on From: .OR. To: may not
M be exactly the same. A simple example:
M I receive email from, and write
Hello Roelof,
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 11:06:26 +0100 GMT (03/01/2008, 17:06 +0700 GMT),
Roelof Otten wrote:
TF You can still have them seperated, nobody forces you to use them for
TF both Incoming and Outgoing. Tick only one of the boxes, it's that
TF easy.
RO But that would be self defeating for a
think.
No, I think Roelof got it right: There would be no seperate Incoming
and Outgoing trees. His problem is that he cannot see which filter
does what, which is true, as we will have only one kind of filters.
If you want, tickmarks could be added like the flags now, showing
in the (single) tree
Hello MAU,
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 12:10:52 +0100 GMT (03/01/2008, 18:10 +0700 GMT),
MAU wrote:
M - If From: A .OR. To: A, move to folder A.
M - If From: B .OR. To: B, move to folder B.
M And now assume A writes to B and just CCes me. Where would this message
M end up? And where if it is B who
Hallo Thomas,
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 20:08:01 +0700GMT (3-1-2008, 14:08 +0100, where I
live), you wrote:
TF If you want to seperate them, you have many choices. Two come to mind:
What you're suggesting is that Ritlabs break something that's rather
good at the moment and now you're thinking of ways
Hello Roelof,
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 14:57:48 +0100 GMT (03/01/2008, 20:57 +0700 GMT),
Roelof Otten wrote:
TF If you want to seperate them, you have many choices. Two come to mind:
RO What you're suggesting is that Ritlabs break something that's rather
RO good at the moment and now you're thinking
Hello MAU,
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 15:01:55 +0100 GMT (03/01/2008, 21:01 +0700 GMT),
MAU wrote:
If A sends to B, or B sends to A, and they CC to you, both are now
covered by Incoming filters.
M Of course, but where do the two messages end up? To answer the question
M you just have to be as dumb as
Hello Thomas,
If A sends to B, or B sends to A, and they CC to you, both are now
covered by Incoming filters.
Of course, but where do the two messages end up? To answer the question
you just have to be as dumb as computers are and do exactly what the
code (filter conditions and actions) tell
Hello Thomas,
M If the filters are:
M - If From: A .OR. To: A, move to folder A.
M - If From: B .OR. To: B, move to folder B.
M Do they end up in the same folder, yes or no?
That depends on the order of your incoming filters,
Did you read my first reply to you?
You are not getting my
Het was donderdag 3 januari 2008 om 15:48 uur dat jij iets schreef over 'One
kind of filters' :
Hallo MAU,
M If the filters are:
M - If From: A .OR. To: A, move to folder A.
M - If From: B .OR. To: B, move to folder B.
M Do they end up in the same folder, yes or no?
That depends on the order
Hello MAU,
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 15:48:47 +0100 GMT (03/01/2008, 21:48 +0700 GMT),
MAU wrote:
M Do they end up in the same folder, yes or no?
That depends on the order of your incoming filters,
M Did you read my first reply to you?
Yes.
You are not getting my point:
M And quite certainly you
Hello all,
Thursday, January 3, 2008, Thomas Fernandez wrote:
You are not getting my point:
let me reply again with other reasons against your idea, I am not generally
against it, but I am sure, it will limit of usage and whole Filtering
system will be unintuitive. Let me describe why.
Hello Cees,
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 15:54:12 +0100 GMT (03/01/2008, 21:54 +0700 GMT),
Cees wrote:
M Did you read my first reply to you?
You are not getting my point:
M And quite certainly you are not getting mine. I give up! :)
C I'd say the priority has some influence also. Won't it?
Priority of
On Thursday, January 3, 2008, 8:07:18 AM, Thomas Fernandez wrote:
BTW my wish would also benefit those who use gmail and its derivates
(like thebat.net) on mailing lists.
How? From you suggestions, the first thing I see is that one would
have to go through and rename all their existing filters
Hello Marek,
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 16:09:03 +0100 GMT (03/01/2008, 22:09 +0700 GMT),
Marek Mikus wrote:
MM let me reply again with other reasons against your idea, I am not
MM generally against it, but I am sure, it will limit of usage and
MM whole Filtering system will be unintuitive. Let me
Hello Dwight,
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 10:18:16 -0600 GMT (03/01/2008, 23:18 +0700 GMT),
Dwight A Corrin wrote:
BTW my wish would also benefit those who use gmail and its derivates
(like thebat.net) on mailing lists.
DAC How?
Because Gmail doesn't send your messages back to you when you send
them
On Thursday, January 3, 2008, 7:33:40 PM, Thomas Fernandez wrote:
BTW my wish would also benefit those who use gmail and its
derivates (like thebat.net) on mailing lists.
DAC How?
Because Gmail doesn't send your messages back to you when you send
them to a mailing list. You need to use
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, at 18:38:48 [GMT +0100] (which was 18:38 where I
live) Henk M. de Bruijn wrote:
Added a note ;-)
I added a note because I have some dozen of private maps/folders, not
mailinglists. In which the relevant messages arrive and theirs answers.
I supported this wish first because
Hello TBBETA,
A wish that I would like to bring forward again in these busy times of
creating the best The Bat! there ever was:
https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=3319
--
Cheers,
Thomas.
Hier trifft man eine Menge Bekannter, die man sein genzes Leben noch
nicht gesehen hat. *
Hello Thomas,
A wish that I would like to bring forward again in these busy times of
creating the best The Bat! there ever was:
https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=3319
I thought I had added a comment to your wish when you opened it but it
looks like I didn't. So, I will make some
Hello all,
Wednesday, January 2, 2008, Thomas Fernandez wrote:
A wish that I would like to bring forward again in these busy times of
creating the best The Bat! there ever was:
https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=3319
nice idea, but as I think, worse to implement it.
1) If You will have
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, at 20:00:30 [GMT +0700] (which was 14:00 where I
live) Thomas Fernandez wrote:
A wish that I would like to bring forward again in these busy times of
creating the best The Bat! there ever was:
https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=3319
Added a note ;-)
--
Henk M. de
Hallo Thomas,
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 20:00:30 +0700GMT (2-1-2008, 14:00 +0100, where I
live), you wrote:
TF A wish that I would like to bring forward again in these busy times of
TF creating the best The Bat! there ever was:
TF https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=3319
Ouch! I'd go crazy when all
Hello Roelof,
On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 01:04:49 +0100 GMT (03/01/2008, 07:04 +0700 GMT),
Roelof Otten wrote:
TF A wish that I would like to bring forward again in these busy times of
TF creating the best The Bat! there ever was:
TF https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=3319
RO Ouch! I'd go crazy
Hello Henk,
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 18:38:48 +0100 GMT (03/01/2008, 00:38 +0700 GMT),
Henk M. de Bruijn wrote:
A wish that I would like to bring forward again in these busy times of
creating the best The Bat! there ever was:
https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=3319
HMdB Added a note ;-)
Hello Marek,
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 17:13:24 +0100 GMT (02/01/2008, 23:13 +0700 GMT),
Marek Mikus wrote:
https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=3319
MM nice idea, but as I think, worse to implement it.
MM 1) If You will have one entry and one filters tree, how You will
MM select order of filters
Hello all,
Thursday, January 3, 2008, Thomas Fernandez wrote:
In fact, you can work the same way you work now, if you tick only
Incoming in one set, and only Outgoing in another. The wish will
*allow* you (not force you) to make a filter have both conditions.
OK, You will create filter for
Hello MAU,
On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 17:05:07 +0100 GMT (02/01/2008, 23:05 +0700 GMT),
MAU wrote:
M At first sight your suggestion looks as a nice and reasonable one. I
M don't know how your system could affect the 'filter engine', that's
M for developers to say.
I'm talking here only of the GUI side,
31 matches
Mail list logo
