Hello Doug,
On Mon, 30 Sep 2002, at 10:48:28 [GMT +0100] (which was 5:48:28
AM in NY, USA) Doug Weller wrote:
> What don't you like about Mailbag Assistant?
> Has anyone tried Forkeeps?
Reply to this message has been sent directly to you and to TBOT
as well as this thread has been declared De
Hi Doug.
At 5:48 AM on Monday, September 30, 2002 you
[DW] wrote the following about 'Email
Archiving, was: Editing incoming mail (was:
Wish list item)':
DW> Has anyone tried Forkeeps?
Too expensive for me.
--
Jan Rifkinson
Ridgefield, CT USA
TB! V1.61/W2K_SP3
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002 11:49:22 -0400
James Senick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Jan,
>
> On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, at 11:19:22 [GMT -0400] (which was 11:19:22
> AM in NY, USA) Jan Rifkinson wrote:
>
[SNIP]
> > In addition, I think there are other
> > programs, Mailbag Assistant or Zoot for
>
On Saturday, September 28, 2002, 10:19:22 AM, Jan Rifkinson wrote:
> A valid point but I think lobbying for something that already
> exists in a different form sort of belongs in the dept. of
> redundancy dept.
It doesn't exist. I cannot put the cursor on a message, type in a
note, move th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Thomas F. [TF] wrote:'
TF> I think this is still very TB related, though. ;-)
The problem though Thomas is that things seem to be getting
circular. The same points are being made over and over again w
Hello Jan,
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002 11:19:22 -0400 GMT (28/09/02, 22:19 +0700 GMT),
Jan Rifkinson wrote:
JR> A valid point but I think lobbying for something that already
JR> exists in a different form sort of belongs in the dept. of
JR> redundancy dept.
Most functions in TB exist in several forms.
Hello Jan,
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, at 11:19:22 [GMT -0400] (which was 11:19:22
AM in NY, USA) Jan Rifkinson wrote:
> A valid point but I think lobbying for
> something that already exists in a
> different form sort of belongs in the dept.
> of redundancy dept.
Redundancy? Redundancy? I'm
Hi Jim!
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
on Saturday, September 28, 2002, 4:57:03 AM, you wrote:
JL> Saturday, September 28, 2002, 8:35:40 AM, you wrote:
DH>> Wrong. I do change occasionally the subject line *in conversation*.
DH>> That is, I assign a meaningful/changed s
Hello Jan,
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, at 10:15:54 [GMT -0400] (which was 10:15:54
AM in NY, USA) Jan Rifkinson wrote:
JS>> [...] There's simply no reason not to
JS>> have this feature available. [/...]
> Sure there is.
> This is a different program & the
> feature[s] you are talking about can
Hello Jan,
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, at 09:46:13 [GMT -0400] (which was 9:46:13
AM in NY, USA) Jan Rifkinson wrote:
> Without commenting on the merits of your
> position one way or the other, it strikes
> me that you may be coming to this question
> from a very different POV that some of the
Hello Dierk,
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, at 12:21:50 [GMT +0200] (which was 6:21:50
AM in NY, USA) Dierk Haasis wrote:
> What I cannot do is take your comments, adjust them as I like (even
> for private use!) and then either say it is mine or it is yours. What
> I can do, is write something that is cle
Hello Dierk,
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, at 09:35:40 [GMT +0200] (which was 3:35:40
AM in NY, USA) Dierk Haasis wrote:
> Wrong. I do change occasionally the subject line *in conversation*.
> That is, I assign a meaningful/changed subject line to a reply. I am
> very particular when it comes to vital co
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Thomas F. [TF] wrote:'
DH>> I am very particular when it comes to vital communication and
DH>> *don't want anybody to change my mails* (this is for all of you
DH>> that don't think international Copyrigh
Hello Dierk,
Saturday, September 28, 2002, 11:21:50 AM, you wrote:
DH> What I cannot do is take your comments, adjust them as I like (even
DH> for private use!) and then either say it is mine or it is yours. What
DH> I can do, is write something that is clearly identified as a comment
DH> unto
Hello Jim!
On Saturday, September 28, 2002 at 11:57:03 AM you wrote:
> Sorry, I completely disagree with you on this.
No, you don't.
> This being the case,I do not see any problem in annotating the text or subject
> line of an E-mail. Because some people may be lazy or careless in their
> sub
Hello Dierk,
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002 09:35:40 +0200 GMT (28/09/02, 14:35 +0700 GMT),
Dierk Haasis wrote:
DH> I am very particular when it comes to vital communication and
DH> *don't want anybody to change my mails* (this is for all of you
DH> that don't think international Copyright doesn't hold if
Hello Dierk,
Saturday, September 28, 2002, 8:35:40 AM, you wrote:
DH> Wrong. I do change occasionally the subject line *in conversation*.
DH> That is, I assign a meaningful/changed subject line to a reply. I am
DH> very particular when it comes to vital communication and *don't want
DH> anybod
Hello James!
On Saturday, September 28, 2002 at 1:13:27 AM you wrote:
> It amazes me why many don't understand the need for it. If I
> had to guess, I'd have to say that many who don't see the need
> to edit the subject lines either don't carry on discussions or
> they simply do not use email f
25.04.2002, you wrote:
G> You can remove attachement from incoming mail (right click|delete on
G> the attachement) which should take care of the space saving issue. As
G> for text in the email, you can't but unless you get very weird emails
G> to saving is going to be minimal and outpaced by
ON Thursday, April 25, 2002, 10:48:56 AM, you wrote:
V> Hi all,
V> About year ago (may be more) there was discussion on introducing into
V> TB! a feature to make possible to edit incoming message directly in a
V> folder it is. It was told that Callypso can do that.
V> As I see, TB! doesn't h
Hi all,
About year ago (may be more) there was discussion on introducing into
TB! a feature to make possible to edit incoming message directly in a
folder it is. It was told that Callypso can do that.
As I see, TB! doesn't have this feature still. I think it would be
very convenient to have th
21 matches
Mail list logo
