-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I thought I'd comment on Thomas Fernandez's contribution to the list,
sent on Thu, 7 Dec 2000 16:23:14 +0800:
[...]
TF> Swear words do exist in English as they do in Spanish. And they make
TF> neither language any warmer. The usage of the language is
Hi Douglas,
On Thu, 07 Dec 2000 00:03:36 -0600GMT (07/12/2000, 14:03 +0800GMT),
Douglas Hinds wrote:
TF>> It must be the academic level.
DH> Old World / New World, Cultural Milieu
No, not the New World vs Old World argument. You'll find all levels of
education in every country. I know very wel
Hello Thomas & other fellow TB! Users following this thread,
Wednesday, December 06, 2000, you stated regarding :
DH>> Whether a formal and vernacular way of expressing something is
DH>> chosen is often related to the degree of involvement or detachment
DH>> of the person speaking, the academ
Hi Douglas,
On Wed, 06 Dec 2000 22:29:24 -0600GMT (07/12/2000, 12:29 +0800GMT),
Douglas Hinds wrote:
DH> Whether a formal and vernacular way of expressing something is
DH> chosen is often related to the degree of involvement or detachment
DH> of the person speaking, the academic level reached an
Hello Karin & other fellow TB! Users following this thread,
Tuesday, December 05, 2000, for better or worse you revived a
discussion regarding the meaning of a couple of a couple of Spanish
words.
KS> ... "pendejada" means "stupidity".
That is indeed the general usage. It shares etymological o
On 04-12-2000 at 02:37, Marck D. Pearlstone kindly wrote:
> Douglas Hinds wrote and made these points:
DH>> However, not all ISPs are born equal ... describing such goings on
DH>> is "***" and the term often used to describe those who do this
DH>> is "". Both terms refer to parts of the
12/4/2000 at 1:47 PM
For what it's worth- you can keep the same ISP and just change mail
services...
I use Mailbank as my email server, though I have a cable modem and access to
the cable company's mail server.
Mailbank let's me use their SMTP server- provided I log on with my username
and pass
Hallo Randy,
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000 11:36:17 -0600 (CST) GMT (05/12/2000, 01:36 +0800 GMT),
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
rpn> wow, i didn't mean to get you guys so riled up...
Yeah, that's us, trying to solve every user's problem. :-)
rpn> Thanks anyway.
Most welcome.
--
Cheers,
Thomas.
"Tomorrow
wow, i didn't mean to get you guys so riled up...
As for your question about shopping for a new ISP, I already am.
I'm in a 1-Year commitment which ends in April, however, with Primary
Network, who was the first to my door with DSL service.
I take it from your comments, that the mailing list f
Dear Douglas,
Going back 01:10 04.12.2000. when you uttered the following thoughts:
> gmx also?
GMX Global Message Exchange AG, eine 100% Tochter der cubenet AG, is
not an ISP Internet Service provider. Thanks.
I couldn't find a limit on their mail server yet.
While we're at it GMX lists thes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Douglas,
On 04 December 2000 at 18:10:46 -0600 (which was 00:10 where I
live) Douglas Hinds wrote and made these points:
DH> However, not all ISPs are born equal ... describing such goings on
DH> is "***" and the term often used to describ
Hello Jan & other fellow TB! Users,
Sunday, December 03, 2000, Jan asked:
JR> what do you do, Douglas?
JR> Inquiring minds want to know.
Briefly, CeDeCoR is a non-profit NGO dedicated to supporting
sustainable development in Mexico (a country whose elections are
cleaner than those in the US)
Hello Douglas,
On Sunday, December 03, 2000 @ 18:10:46 -0600, you wrote the
following about "ISP limits number of recipients to 10..."
Douglas> An important part of what I do professionally can be
Douglas> considered "policy making" [...], Another
Hello Johannes & other fellow TB! Users,
Sunday, December 03, 2000, you stated:
>> ... Does YOUR ISP do that?
JMP> No, my ISP server has a specific setup (RADIUS limiting you to 100
JMP> mails a day, 1000 mails a month, default SMTP server even REWRITES the
JMP> From:-Line you where sending,
Hi there Douglas,
Going back 20:29 03.12.2000. when you uttered the following thoughts:
> That's exactly the company's problem.
"We don't care. We don't have to. We're the Phone Company". Reminds
you of something?
> Yes, do you? Can you count to 10? Do it strike you as a decent
> number of CCs
Hello Johannes & other fellow TB! Users,
Sunday, December 03, 2000, you stated in relation to my legitimate
suggestion:
>> Alternatively, you could threaten the ISP, telling it that you
>> intend to email the complaint departments of PCWorld and the ZD
>> magazines with your modern day email h
On Saturday, December 02, 2000, 4:58:49 PM, syv wrote:
> What I am looking for is either as a macro or a built-in feature,
> you hilight 10 names and it will create 10 messages.
A new featured introduced in 1.48 beta 9 is doing just that. Please
be patient.
--
Best regards,
Ming-Li
The Bat! 1
Hi Thomas,
On Sunday, December 03, 2000, 12:28:45 PM, you wrote to the list:
RB>> My problem is that my ISP will not allow messages with more than
RB>> 10 recipients.
TF> They do this to avoid spam,
Correct.
TF> although 10 is a very low number. I think 100 is more common.
Correct again
Hi there Douglas,
Going back 00:54 03.12.2000. when you uttered the following thoughts:
> Alternatively, you could threaten the ISP, telling it that you
> intend to email the complaint departments of PCWorld and the ZD
> magazines with your modern day email horror story. Tell them you pay
> for
Hello syv & other fellow TB! Users,
Saturday, December 02, 2000, you stated in reference to Randy's
problem:
RB>>> My problem is that my ISP will not allow messages with more than
RB>>> 10 recipients.
And my having expressed the point of view:
DH>> As you mention, the problem is w/ the ISP. T
Hallo Randy,
On Sat, 2 Dec 2000 06:48:48 -0600 GMT (02/12/2000, 20:48 +0800 GMT),
Randy Breese wrote:
RB> My problem is that my ISP will not allow messages with more than
RB> 10 recipients.
They do this to avoid spam, although 10 is a very low number. I think
100 is more common.
RB> Is there a
Hallo syv,
On Sat, 2 Dec 2000 16:58:49 -0800 GMT (03/12/2000, 08:58 +0800 GMT),
syv wrote:
s> Many ISP will not relay mail with more than 5 or 10
s> recipients.
That's a rather low figure. I often have more than 5 or 10 recipients
in company emails. I also receive suchmails, but very rately fro
Hi TBUDL,
...
RB>> I'm wondering if there is some feature in TB! that I
RB>> can use to deal with a problem I'm having.
RB>> My problem is that my ISP will not allow messages with more than
RB>> 10 recipients.
DH> As you mention, the problem is w/ the ISP. TB! can't anticipate this
DH>
Hello Randy & other fellow TB! Users,
Saturday, December 02, 2000, you stated:
RB> I'm wondering if there is some feature in TB! that I can use to deal
RB> with a problem I'm having.
RB> My problem is that my ISP will not allow messages with more than
RB> 10 recipients.
As you mention, the pr
Hello, all...
I'm wondering if there is some feature in TB! that I can use to deal
with a problem I'm having.
Although probably 99% of my email goes out to 1 user, I occasionally
need to send it to a group of people. My problem is that my ISP will
not allow messages with more than 10 recipients
25 matches
Mail list logo
