Hello Thomas,
On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 at 23:05:44[GMT +0700](which was 17:05 where I
live) you wrote:
TF If you are talking about addressbook groups, I suspect you may have
TF your own address in that group too. So when you send a message to the
TF whole group, you'll get it as an incoming mail, of
Hello Scott,
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 at22:53:39[GMT -0500](which was 04:53 where I live)
you wrote:
SM If it's not a mailing list, then it doesn't really make sense, unless
SM you have (had) some kind of configuration problem where TB! thought that the
SM inbox folder was the Sent Mail folder.
I
Hello Scott,
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 at21:53:39[GMT -0500](which was 03:53 where I live)
you wrote:
MW Are you saying you want *another* copy sent to you?
RW Well some of my mail (most if it actually) comes to the inbox anyway
RW so why doesn't it all so that it can all automatically get threaded?
Hello Richard,
On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 10:11:04 +0100 GMT (10/10/02, 16:11 +0700 GMT),
Richard Wakeford wrote:
SM If it's not a mailing list, then it doesn't really make sense,
SM unless you have (had) some kind of configuration problem where
SM TB! thought that the inbox folder was the Sent Mail
Hello Scott,
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 at21:53:39[GMT -0500](which was 03:53 where I live)
you wrote:
SM I suspect that you're confusing messages for a mailing list and normal
SM non-list messages.
SM When you send a normal (non-list) message, TB sends the email, then
SM plops it into the
Hello Thomas,
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 at11:31:35[GMT +0700](which was 05:31 where I live)
you wrote:
RW Even more baffled. So, if I send a mail to someone who is not in my
RW address book or on a mailing list, I have to CC it to myself to get a
RW copy?
TF It has nothing to do with your
On Wednesday, October 9, 2002, 08:25, Richard Wakeford wrote:
Until yesterday all my sent mail came back to the Inbox without a CC
or rule.
Could it be your ISP automatically adding a BCC to you on every mail you
send? Ask them!
--
Regards,
Marcus Ohlström
Using The Bat! v1.60q on
ON Wednesday, October 9, 2002, 8:19:34 AM, you wrote:
RW Hello Marck,
RW Then some messages started not showing up in the Inbox or the other
RW reader and I'm now told, obviously correctly, that I have to put a
RW rule in the Outbox redirecting my mail to the Inbox so that it can
RW be
Wednesday, October 9, 2002, 8:22:54 AM, you wrote:
MO On Wednesday, October 9, 2002, 08:25, Richard Wakeford wrote:
Until yesterday all my sent mail came back to the Inbox without a CC
or rule.
MO Could it be your ISP automatically adding a BCC to you on every mail you
MO send? Ask them!
Hello myob,
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 at14:54:54[GMT +0100](which was 14:54 where I live)
you wrote:
MO Could it be your ISP automatically adding a BCC to you on every mail you
MO send? Ask them!
m IIRC, Richard, that's what CIX/Ameol does.
Yes it does but I was still getting mail in my TB inbox
Hello Gerard,
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 at09:42:44[GMT +0200](which was 08:42 where I live)
you wrote:
RW Then some messages started not showing up in the Inbox or the other
RW reader and I'm now told, obviously correctly, that I have to put a
RW rule in the Outbox redirecting my mail to the Inbox so
Hi, Richard!
Wednesday, October 9, 2002, 1:28:02 AM, you wrote:
RW Hello Thomas,
RW Ah, all my questions being gradually answered apart from why messages
RW originally went to the inbox without a CC and now don't but I will
RW amend my rules so that outgoing messages go straight to the
Hello Thomas,
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 at11:43:36[GMT +0700](which was 05:43 where I live)
you wrote:
TF I filter mailing lists only at incoming time. Outgoing filters are
TF important for normal mail, where your sent message doesn't come back
TF to you.
Oh, I thought *all* mail comes back to me, at
Hello Scott,
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002 at21:29:53[GMT -0500](which was 03:29 where I live)
you wrote:
RW Yes I have but it's all far too complicated and for me and leaves me
RW half way down page one!
SM What are you still having trouble with? I'm trying to figure out
SM regular expressions
Hi, Richard!
Tuesday, October 8, 2002, 2:12:30 AM, you wrote:
RW It's not that I'm having trouble with it because I don't think, in my
RW situation, I shall ever need such complicated rules. I just wish that
RW the more simple rules could be explained to remove any un clearness or
RW
Hello Richard,
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 08:07:05 +0100 GMT (08/10/02, 14:07 +0700 GMT),
Richard Wakeford wrote:
RW Oh, I thought *all* mail comes back to me, at least mine does (I
RW think). Do you mean by normal mail that is not in the address
RW book?
No, I mean a mail that I sent just to a
Hello Thomas,
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 at22:40:47[GMT +0700](which was 16:40 where I live)
you wrote:
TF No, I mean a mail that I sent just to a recipient, not to a list. For
TF example if I send a message directly to your address. It will not come
TF back to me, unless I include my own address as
Richard-
I got lost somewhere in the circular logic here, but...
The messages you send out end up in your Sent Mail folder. Are you
saying you want *another* copy sent to you? If so, then, yes, you need
to CC or BCC yourself. If you're just wanting confirmation that the
message you sent got to
Hello Mark,
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 at14:28:11[GMT -0700](which was 22:28 where I live)
you wrote:
MW I got lost somewhere in the circular logic here, but...
You're lost!! :-)
MW The messages you send out end up in your Sent Mail folder.
That doesn't mean they reach their destination though. I've
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Richard,
@8-Oct-2002, 22:54 Richard Wakeford [RW] in
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
MW Are you saying you want *another* copy sent to you?
RW Well some of my mail (most if it actually) comes to the inbox
RW anyway so why
Richard-
Tuesday, October 8, 2002, 2:54:08 PM, you wrote:
MW Are you saying you want *another* copy sent to you?
RW Well some of my mail (most if it actually) comes to the inbox anyway
RW so why doesn't it all so that it can all automatically get threaded?
If your outgoing mail ends up in
Hi, Richard!
Tuesday, October 8, 2002, 4:54:08 PM, you wrote:
MW The messages you send out end up in your Sent Mail folder.
RW That doesn't mean they reach their destination though. I've had 3
RW messages in the last 24 hours that have just disappeared even though
RW they are shown as sent in
Hello Richard,
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 21:44:11 +0100 GMT (09/10/02, 03:44 +0700 GMT),
Richard Wakeford wrote:
TF No, I mean a mail that I sent just to a recipient, not to a list. For
TF example if I send a message directly to your address. It will not come
TF back to me, unless I include my own
Hello Marck,
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 at02:37:59[GMT +0100](which was 02:37 where I live)
you wrote:
MW Are you saying you want *another* copy sent to you?
RW Well some of my mail (most if it actually) comes to the inbox
RW anyway so why doesn't it all so that it can all automatically
RW get
Hello Mark,
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 at19:37:27[GMT -0700](which was 03:37 where I live)
you wrote:
MW Are you saying you want *another* copy sent to you?
RW Well some of my mail (most if it actually) comes to the inbox anyway
RW so why doesn't it all so that it can all automatically get threaded?
Well,
I set up a filter for a mail group as described earlier and only half
the group messages make it to the relevant folder, the rest stay
obstinately in the inbox :-(
I have the rule adressees are sender to group .
Also how do I get my replies to messages from that group to go into
the
ON Monday, October 7, 2002, 5:46:12 PM, you wrote:
RW Well,
RW I set up a filter for a mail group as described earlier and only half
RW the group messages make it to the relevant folder, the rest stay
RW obstinately in the inbox :-(
RW I have the rule adressees are sender to group .
Hi
Hello Richard,
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002 16:46:12 +0100 GMT (07/10/02, 22:46 +0700 GMT),
Richard Wakeford wrote:
RW I set up a filter for a mail group as described earlier and only half
RW the group messages make it to the relevant folder, the rest stay
RW obstinately in the inbox :-(
RW I have the
Richard-
I think one of the main things that people trip over is that the
strings in the Filtering strings box are treated as AND clauses
rather than OR clauses. In other words, if you have more than one line
in the Filtering strings box, then *both* of those cases have to be
true in order for
Hello Mark,
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002 at12:12:36[GMT -0700](which was 20:12 where I live)
you wrote:
MW I think one of the main things that people trip over is that the
MW strings in the Filtering strings box are treated as AND clauses
MW rather than OR clauses. In other words, if you have more than
Hello Gerard,
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002 at19:14:54[GMT +0200](which was 18:14 where I live)
you wrote:
G - You need to determine a UNIQUE filtering characteristic that does not
G change over time.
G The simplest being the email address a person.
I thought I had but I've been told one answer, the
Hello Thomas,
On Tue, 8 Oct 2002 at01:35:27[GMT +0700](which was 19:35 where I live)
you wrote:
TF Check whether this is always true. Is sender the group? I believe in
TF this group, it isn't.
Now you've got me thinking. As my name is not in the group or the
address book I assumed sender was
Hello Richard,
On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 at 16:46:12 [GMT +0100], you wrote:
RW After reading all the FAQ and help files
Just wanted to check. Have you read:
http://www.pcwize.com/thebat/filtering.shtml
Cheers,
Leif Gregory
--
List Moderator (and fellow registered end-user)
PCWize Editor
Hello Leif,
On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 at20:00:27[GMT -0600](which was 03:00 where I
live) you wrote:
LG Just wanted to check. Have you read:
LG http://www.pcwize.com/thebat/filtering.shtml
Yes I have but it's all far too complicated and for me and leaves me
half way down page one!
--
Best
Hello Richard,
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002 22:25:28 +0100 GMT (08/10/02, 04:25 +0700 GMT),
Richard Wakeford wrote:
TF Check whether this is always true. Is sender the group? I believe in
TF this group, it isn't.
RW Now you've got me thinking. As my name is not in the group or the
RW address book I
35 matches
Mail list logo
