Re: Running 32 and 64 bit versions side by side

Hello Thomas, > FWIW, I run MyGate together with TB 64bit on my laptop. Most of the newsgroups I used to monitor are basically dead, but it is good to know that I will be able to use MyGate with the TB 64bit if I so desire. Thanks for the info. -- Best regards, Miguel A. Urech (Els Poblets (A

Re: Running 32 and 64 bit versions side by side

Hello MAU, On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 20:17:43 +0200 GMT (10-Apr-18, 01:17 +0700 GMT), MAU wrote: > I'm still using 32bit TB version because I still use a couple of > plug-ins (MyMacros and MyGate)for which AFAIK there aren't 64bit > versions. FWIW, I run MyGate together

Running 32 and 64 bit versions side by side

Hello all, I'm still using 32bit TB version because I still use a couple of plug-ins (MyMacros and MyGate)for which AFAIK there aren't 64bit versions. I will probably dump these two plug-ins and move to the 64bit version of TB, but I would like to run both "side

Re[3]: previous versions of tb?

> Hello [EMAIL PROTECTED], > Tuesday, March 4, 2008, 1:17:14 PM, you wrote: L>> Good evening Volker, L>> L>> It was foretold that on 04/03/2008 @ 22:05:13 GMT+0100 (which was L>> 18:05:13 where I live) Volker Ahrendt would write: VA>>> Not @RITLabs, but as far as I can see (quite) complete:

Re: previous versions of tb?

Good evening Paul, It was foretold that on 05/03/2008 @ 10:24:17 GMT-0800 (which was 15:24:17 where I live) Paul Berger would write: PB> If you also want the International Pack for 3.99.3 I can send it if PB> you give me your email address. Sure. knaepkens.luc @ gmail.com -- Best rega

Re[2]: previous versions of tb?

Hello [EMAIL PROTECTED], Tuesday, March 4, 2008, 1:17:14 PM, you wrote: L> Good evening Volker, L> L> It was foretold that on 04/03/2008 @ 22:05:13 GMT+0100 (which was L> 18:05:13 where I live) Volker Ahrendt would write: VA>> Not @RITLabs, but as far as I can see (quite) complete: VA>>

Re: previous versions of tb?

Good evening Volker, It was foretold that on 04/03/2008 @ 22:05:13 GMT+0100 (which was 18:05:13 where I live) Volker Ahrendt would write: VA> Not @RITLabs, but as far as I can see (quite) complete: VA> Excellent!!! Just what i was looking for Volke

Re: previous versions of tb?

> Good evening Rick, > > where one could get the older ones in case one would decide to roll > back. I just lost my version of pro 3.99.29. > I'd be much abliged :-) > Mr. Ahrendt just posted a great list which should do the trick :) -- Rick The American Republican Party: Supporting Big

Re: previous versions of tb?

x27;m a creature of habit i like to have some backup... i already lost my archive of previous versions of the pro editions. I seem to recall that once ritlabs had a directory where one could get the older ones in case one would decide to roll back. I just lost my version of pro 3.99.29. I&#

Re: previous versions of tb?

[Reply to: »Luc« · 2008-03-04 · 21:55 h (CET)] Moin, Luc! > Is there a page on ritlabs where i can find previous versions of > TB? Not @RITLabs, but as far as I can see (quite) complete: <http://thebat.zetema.de/download.html#setup> (German website) HTH Cheers! VA - -- Q&

Re: previous versions of tb?

> Good afternoon list, > Is there a page on ritlabs where i can find previous versions of TB? > I can hunt around but what's wrong with v4? (you may have already posted issues and I missed them) -- Rick Make no mistake; The war in Iraq is a war to secure oil profits. S

previous versions of tb?

Good afternoon list, Is there a page on ritlabs where i can find previous versions of TB? -- Best regards, Luc http://www.dzinelabs.com Powered by The Bat! version 3.99.29 with Windows XP (build 2600), version 5.1 Service Pack 2 and

Returning to previous versions

Thanks to all who responded. I certainly hope I won't need to return to my current version, but it's helpful to know how to do that should I need to. -- Mike Current version is 3.95.06 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/

Re: Returning to previous versions

Hi On Thursday 11 January 2007 at 3:22:41 PM, in , Mike Greenbaum wrote: > Would I have the complete program files if I backed up > everything in C:\Program Files\The Bat! or are there other files > lurking elsewhere on my hard drive? You may or may not have a directory at C:\Documents and Setti

Re: Returning to previous versions

Hi Mike, on Thu, 11 Jan 2007 08:22:41 -0700GMT (11.01.2007, 16:22 +0100GMT here), you wrote: If I try it and decide I don't like it, how do I return to my previous version which is 2.01.3? >>> Create a complete backup prior to installing the new version. Then >>> restore it in case you

Re[2]: Returning to previous versions

>>> If I try it and decide I don't like it, how do I return to my >>> previous version which is 2.01.3? >> Create a complete backup prior to installing the new version. Then >> restore it in case you want it back. > By complete backup, Peter means a backup of the program files > directory as well

Re: Returning to previous versions

Hi Chris, on Thu, 11 Jan 2007 02:32:14 -0600GMT (11.01.2007, 09:32 +0100GMT here), you wrote: CW> Peter Meyns @ 2007-1-11 12:30:38 AM CW> "Returning to previous versions" CW> >>> If I try it and decide I don't like it, how do I return to my >>> pre

Re: Returning to previous versions

Peter Meyns @ 2007-1-11 12:30:38 AM "Returning to previous versions" >> If I try it and decide I don't like it, how do I return to my >> previous version which is 2.01.3? > Create a complete backup prior to installing the new version. Then > restore it in ca

Re: Returning to previous versions

Hi Mike, on Wed, 10 Jan 2007 21:37:45 -0700GMT (11.01.07, 05:37 +0200GMT here), Mike Greenbaum wrote: MG> The new Christmas edition says one can try it for 30 days, but it MG> also says to install it over the previous version. MG> If I try it and decide I don't like it, how do I return to my MG>

Returning to previous versions

The new Christmas edition says one can try it for 30 days, but it also says to install it over the previous version. If I try it and decide I don't like it, how do I return to my previous version which is 2.01.3? -- Mike Current version is 3.9

Difference between versions

Hello Everyone, I just went to the ritlabs homepage to check on TB and noticed that a new version is available. Before everyone gets excited, its 3.85.03 and apart from me, everyone else probably knows about this as it happened almost two months ago. The what's new sections provides lots of detail

Re: finding newer versions of TB!

Hello all, Tuesday, May 2, 2006, WL wrote: > This feels like a silly question, but oh well... > I just got an email from [EMAIL PROTECTED] about a bug that > is fixed in version 3.81.01. > Where would I find it? It doesn't seem to be listed on the > main download page (3.80.03) , nor the beta p

finding newer versions of TB!

Hello, all. This feels like a silly question, but oh well... I just got an email from [EMAIL PROTECTED] about a bug that is fixed in version 3.81.01. Where would I find it? It doesn't seem to be listed on the main download page (3.80.03) , nor the beta page (3.80.01). Thanks, -- WL _

Re: Versions 2 and 3 of The Bat Choke on some messages

Hello Roelof Otten & everyone else, on 25-Nov-2005 at 22:24 you (Roelof Otten) wrote: > What can I say, I try to please. ...and TB picked this cookie: > I can please only one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow > isn't looking good either. Another case for the "miracles of randomne

Re: Versions 2 and 3 of The Bat Choke on some messages

On 11/24/05, Alexander S. Kunz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello Jeff Gaines & everyone else, > > on 24-Nov-2005 at 18:49 you (Jeff Gaines) wrote: > > >> try using the dispatcher. the problem i used to have was a message with > >> a virus which would never get downloaded and would show up every ch

Re: Versions 2 and 3 of The Bat Choke on some messages

Roelof Otten wrote: Hallo Dwight, On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 16:12:01 -0600GMT (24-11-2005, 23:12 +0100, where I live), you wrote: DAC> What is the point of a virus checker if you aren't going to check DAC> incoming mail for viruses? What's the use of having a mail client that's invulnerable to viru

Re: Versions 2 and 3 of The Bat Choke on some messages

Hallo Alexander, On Fri, 25 Nov 2005 17:17:01 +0100GMT (25-11-2005, 17:17 +0100, where I live), you wrote: ASK> I have to park this message, this is probably the best explanation of the ASK> problem yet. :-) What can I say, I try to please. -- Groetjes, Roelof I can please only one person per

Re: Versions 2 and 3 of The Bat Choke on some messages

Hello Dwight A Corrin & everyone else, on 24-Nov-2005 at 23:12 you (Dwight A Corrin) wrote: > I don't want to import any messages with viruses into my message base. > Then I have a whole infected mailbox No. You have a message containing virus-code in your message base. Thats all. Your message b

Re: Versions 2 and 3 of The Bat Choke on some messages

Hello Roelof Otten & everyone else, on 24-Nov-2005 at 23:25 you (Roelof Otten) wrote: > You can compare that behaviour with you standing on a chair trying to > screw in a light bulb and me kicking the chair from under your feet, > saying: 'Sorry, I was afraid you would electrocute yourself.' I h

Re: Versions 2 and 3 of The Bat Choke on some messages

Hallo Dwight, On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 16:12:01 -0600GMT (24-11-2005, 23:12 +0100, where I live), you wrote: DAC> What is the point of a virus checker if you aren't going to check DAC> incoming mail for viruses? What's the use of having a mail client that's invulnerable to viruses when you're going t

Re: Versions 2 and 3 of The Bat Choke on some messages

On Thursday, November 24, 2005, 12:04:46 PM, Alexander S. Kunz wrote: > You must *exclude* TBs temporary directory (where the mails are > initially downloaded to before they get imported to your > messagebase) from your on-access virus scanner, or else TB can not > put the temporary message to the

Re[2]: Versions 2 and 3 of The Bat Choke on some messages

Hello Group, On Thursday, November 24, 2005, 6:04:46 PM, Alexander wrote: > You must *exclude* TBs temporary directory (where the mails are initially > downloaded to before they get imported to your messagebase) from your > on-access virus scanner, or else TB can not put the temporary message to

Re: Versions 2 and 3 of The Bat Choke on some messages

Hello Jeff Gaines & everyone else, on 24-Nov-2005 at 18:49 you (Jeff Gaines) wrote: >> try using the dispatcher. the problem i used to have was a message with >> a virus which would never get downloaded and would show up every check. >> you can find it in the dispatcher and delete it there. > I

Re[2]: Versions 2 and 3 of The Bat Choke on some messages

Hello Group, On Thursday, November 24, 2005, 5:22:31 PM, Dwight wrote: > On Thursday, November 24, 2005, 8:37:28 AM, John P. Case, M.D. wrote: >> TB will hang on one message ("downloading 18/34 headers") and abort > try using the dispatcher. the problem i used to have was a message > with a vi

Re: Versions 2 and 3 of The Bat Choke on some messages

On Thursday, November 24, 2005, 8:37:28 AM, John P. Case, M.D. wrote: > TB will hang on one message ("downloading 18/34 headers") and abort try using the dispatcher. the problem i used to have was a message with a virus which would never get downloaded and would show up every check. you can find

Versions 2 and 3 of The Bat Choke on some messages

Hello all, Happy Thanksgiving. I have been using TB foreight years or so. Increasingly commonly, in the process of retrieving messages, TB will hang on one message ("downloading 18/34 headers") and abort. Again and again it will not get past that message (which is usually spam, but then, 9

Re: Reproducing directory structures between versions of TB

Hi, Roelof, Tuesday, December 21, 2004, 9:05:50 PM, you wrote: R> Hallo Jonathan, R> On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 20:02:57 -0500GMT (22-12-2004, 2:02 +0100, where I R> live), you wrote: JAS>> I'm using The Bat! 2.11.02, and I'm trying to make a _very_ JAS>> complicated directory structure and filter

Re: Reproducing directory structures between versions of TB

Hallo Jonathan, On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 20:02:57 -0500GMT (22-12-2004, 2:02 +0100, where I live), you wrote: JAS> I'm using The Bat! 2.11.02, and I'm trying to make a _very_ JAS> complicated directory structure and filter set work identically on JAS> both my desktop and my laptop machine. It or

Reproducing directory structures between versions of TB

Hi, All, I'm using The Bat! 2.11.02, and I'm trying to make a _very_ complicated directory structure and filter set work identically on both my desktop and my laptop machine. It originated on my desktop. Now, the desktop has more than one hard drive, and for filespace reasons, the mail

Re: HTML versions of mail

Hi On Wednesday, 1 December, 2004, at 8:09:16 PM, Anthony G. Atkielski wrote: > For what it's worth, one of the reasons I bought TB was to eliminate > things like HTML e-mail. I prefer to see only plain text in e-mail. > It's the only safe e-mail. I agree entirely. It's such a shame that TB w

Re: HTML versions of mail

Marck D Pearlstone writes: > If the images are references to online images, The Bat! (quite > correctly, and this is not scheduled to be changed) will not go online > to download extras not sent with an email. To download such images is > a breach of TB's security model and those email programs th

Re: HTML versions of mail

Dear Sharyn, @1-Dec-2004, 11:30 -0500 (01-Dec 16:30 UK time) Sharyn Hutchens [SH] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: SH> I hope this hasn't been asked here recently -- if so, feel SH> free to tell me to hit the archives. Okay, this *is* a standard FAQ. SH> ... html version ... I open it, the graphi

HTML versions of mail

I hope this hasn't been asked here recently -- if so, feel free to tell me to hit the archives. I've been using TB for over a year now and really love it. At some point I set it give me text messages. I get the html version as an attachment, but whenI open it, the graphics have not been downl

Re: Difference(s) Between The Bat! 3.0's Two Versions

Hello, Mica! Thank you very much for your response to the message that I posted to you on TBUDL (13 October 2004)! On Monday, 1 November 2004 2:31 PM, Mica Mijatovic wrote: MM> ...No, *I* have to apologize, since the missive of MM> mine I am prone to accept as the well of confusion, MM> partly due

Re: Difference(s) Between The Bat! 3.0's Two Versions

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ."_)~~ ~( __ _"o Was another beautiful day, Fri, 15 Oct 2004, @ @ at 22:46:15 -0500, when David M. Dickerson wrote: > Hello, Mica! David. > On Wednesday, 13 October 2004, Mica Mijatovic wrote: MM>> ...Ah, I forgot to add: b

Re: Message files -- versions 1.6x and 2.12

Z> of the above versions? i.e. can I copy the *.tbb and *.tbi from one Z> computer to another? Yes, they're the same. Only the file with folder info is different between these versions account.flx in 1.62 and account.flb for 2.12) -- Groetjes, Roelof Uh, yeah...I MEANT to do tha

Message files -- versions 1.6x and 2.12

I have one computer on Win98SE with The Bat! 1.62 and a new computer with WinXP-Home and The Bat! 2.12. Do the messages.tbb and messages.tbi have the same structure in both of the above versions? i.e. can I copy the *.tbb and *.tbi from one computer to another? Or do I have to use Backup and

Re: Difference(s) Between The Bat! 3.0's Two Versions

between the home > and professional versions is (are) -- besides the obvious > difference of price, of course. They are twins, except that Pro version has a secret seed of Pro features which will sprout in the future. - -- Mica PGP key uploaded at: <http://pgp.mit.edu/> once just before br

Re: Difference(s) Between The Bat! 3.0's Two Versions

Hello, Mica! On Wednesday, 13 October 2004, Mica Mijatovic wrote: MM> ...Ah, I forgot to add: between ethics and health, MM> I always choose health. Although I did not understand some parts of your post, Mica (forgive me), I never would try to tell another person which "flavor" of The Bat! she or h

Re: Difference(s) Between The Bat! 3.0's Two Versions

Hallo Mica, On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 14:19:36 +0200GMT (13-10-2004, 14:19 +0200, where I live), you wrote: MM> And since we all use TB, we all own a camel or two as well, therefore MM> the mangy gratis parakeets too. I like parakeets. :-) -- Groetjes, Roelof Smith & Wesson: The original point and

Re: Difference(s) Between The Bat! 3.0's Two Versions

On Wednesday, October 13, 2004 Mica stated: M> (We know which mailer, outspread like a plague, is M> used in a such role, and it's coming as "free" one, together with the M> paid OS. That is, if you buy a camel, you get a mangy parakeet "gratis". M> And since we all use TB, we all own a camel or t

Re: Difference(s) Between The Bat! 3.0's Two Versions

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ."_)~~ ~( __ _"o Was another beautiful day, Tue, 12 Oct 2004, @ @ at 22:51:47 -0500, when David M. Dickerson wrote: > Although I correspond with several successful shareware > developers/sellers in Russia and Ukraine who use t

Re: Difference(s) Between The Bat! 3.0's Two Versions

Hello, Vili! On Sunday, 10 October 2004, you wrote: KV> ...I write the financial part: companies MUST KV> buy professional version. Private persons can KV> choose. Thank you for the information, Vili! Actually, it poses an ethical dilemma for me, and your point is very relevant. I started doing con

Re: Difference(s) Between The Bat! 3.0's Two Versions

Hello, Roelof! On Saturday, 9 October 2004, you wrote: RO> http://www.ritlabs.com/kb/idx/44/076/article/ ...about the different between the professional and the home versions of The Bat! (I will have to do some research on eToken USB tokens.) Thank you very much for the information, Roelof

Re: Difference(s) Between The Bat! 3.0's Two Versions

DMD> Ever since the release of The Bat! 3.0, I have been DMD> wondering what the difference(s) between the home DMD> and professional versions is (are) -- besides the obvious DMD> difference of price, of course. It is easy (for me) to answer. Ohh... Ok, I saw, someone already

Re: Difference(s) Between The Bat! 3.0's Two Versions

Hallo David, On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 11:28:10 -0500GMT (9-10-2004, 18:28 +0200, where I live), you wrote: DMD> Ever since the release of The Bat! 3.0, I have been http://www.ritlabs.com/kb/idx/44/076/article/ -- Groetjes, Roelof Where's there's smoke, there's toast. The Bat! 3.0.1 RC6 Windows XP

Difference(s) Between The Bat! 3.0's Two Versions

Hello, everyone! Ever since the release of The Bat! 3.0, I have been wondering what the difference(s) between the home and professional versions is (are) -- besides the obvious difference of price, of course. I have not been able to find this information on the RITLabs Web site, although I realize

Re[2]: Steps to disable sending of messages - this is a bug report for all versions

Hi Friday, July 23, 2004, 1:35:49 PM, Wolffe wrote: W> On Friday, July 23, 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] stated: S>> Hi Michael, S>> On 22 July 2004 at 21:18:06GMT +0100, Michael L. Wilson .. MLW>>> 1. Create a new top level folder outside of any account folder tree. . . . MLW>>> 7. Press "send" and

Re: Steps to disable sending of messages - this is a bug report for all versions

Hello TBUDL, on Thu, 22. Jul 2004 at 13:17:17 -0700 Michael L. Wilson wrote: > 7. Press "send" and nothing happens Cannot confirm. Sent from a virtual subfolder of a virtual folder. I have a default account, but due to writing to TBUDL it was catched by my new-mail-template's check and assigne

Re: Steps to disable sending of messages - this is a bug report for all versions

On Friday, July 23, 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] stated: S> Hi Michael, S> On 22 July 2004 at 21:18:06GMT +0100, Michael L. Wilson sent S> an E-Mail mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] on the subject S> of "Steps to disable sending of messages - this is a bug report S> for all versions":

Re: Steps to disable sending of messages - this is a bug report for all versions

Hello Roelof, On Thursday, July 22, 2004 , at 00:13:50[GMT +0200](which was 3:13 PM where I live) you wrote (at least in part): RO> Hallo Michael, RO> On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:17:17 -0700GMT (22-7-2004, 22:17 +0200, where I RO> live), you wrote: MLW>> My guess is that the program does not know

Re: Steps to disable sending of messages - this is a bug report for all versions

Hallo Michael, On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:17:17 -0700GMT (22-7-2004, 22:17 +0200, where I live), you wrote: MLW> My guess is that the program does not know what account to send it MLW> through, so I corrected this by using the %account="" macro and there MLW> is no change. Any ideas would be apprec

Steps to disable sending of messages - this is a bug report for all versions

Greetings All, 1. Create a new top level folder outside of any account folder tree. I created one and called it "discussions" 2. Create a sub-folder under that. I created one called TBUDL 3. Highlight that "TBUDL" folder that is not inside any account tree so that it is selected 4. Go to the addr

Re: OpenPGP versions

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, March 05, 2003 at 08:14:27GMT +1100 (which was 4:14 PM where I live) Tom Sadler wrote and made these points on the subject of "OpenPGP versions": TS> Gi'day David, TS> It is established that on Thursday,

Re: OpenPGP versions

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Gi'day David, It is established that on Thursday, 6 March 2003, at 13:35:53[GMT - -0500](which was 5:35 AM where I live) you wrote: > I have a question. Since TB! supports multiple OpenPGP plugins plus > it's own internal version... Wh

Re: OpenPGP versions

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi David, @5-Mar-2003, 14:18 -0500 (19:18 UK time) David Calvarese [DC] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: MDP>> I have GnuPG and PGP 6.5.8ckt installed here. DC> Thanks, That's exactly what I needed to know. So between GnuPG DC> and the internal versio

Re: OpenPGP versions

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday, March 05, 2003 at 19:12:38GMT + (which was 2:12 PM where I live) Marck D Pearlstone wrote and made these points on the subject of "OpenPGP versions": MDP> Hi David, MDP> @5-Mar-2003, 13:35 -0500 (18:35 UK time)

Re: OpenPGP versions

t version to use? GnuPG? DC> PGP 6.5X? The Internal one? I have GnuPG and PGP 6.5.8ckt installed here. I mostly use GnuPG and sometimes have to use internal version with Submission Forms. More recent versions of PGP (7 and 8) do not have plug-in compatibility and I therefore find them less u

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

ON Thursday, November 21, 2002, 2:44:58 PM, you wrote: GV> That being said, I'd personally prefer if there were an option in TB GV> to turn off all of the client-generated X- headers. But that's just GV> me. No. that's me to and I would like top be able my own ;-) -- Best regards, Gerard -=-

Re[2]: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Markus, Thursday, November 21, 2002, 4:29:58 AM, you wrote: MG> Jonathan Chattin wrote in msgid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] : >> Hmmm, I've never been very fond of the whole "Human Right" argument. >> To be honest it is fairly silly. ... Ok, enough armchair philosophy I'll >> stop now. MG> Should y

Re[2]: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Dierk, Thursday, November 21, 2002, 2:47:43 AM, you wrote: DH> Hello Thomas! DH> Just two examples where information gathering seemed perfectly DH> harmless until times changed: DH> 1. In Denmark you didn't have anything to fear in the 1930s DH> when a survey was made

Re[2]: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Allie C Martin, ACM> I think it prudent that we take any further discussion on this ACM> matter off-list and I hereby make it an official request. Danken Sie Gott! ;-) X-ray rules over headers! -- Warmest tropical wishes, Spike Hint of the day: C:\>deltree\bin\laden ---

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

On Wednesday, November 20, 2002 at 20:31:08 GMT -0600 (which was 8:31 PM where I live), thus spake Sean on the subject of "Student, Private, and Business versions": S> The 'educational' line in the x-mailer header gives out information S> about me that some peopl

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Allie C Martin [ACM] wrote:' ACM> You're not looking at it from a point of principle. A ACM> principled approach avoids this sort of subjective assessment ACM> that's really not valid, since it's just tha

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thomas Fernandez [TF] wrote:' TF> I was replying to Dierk, who is using a "personal" version and TF> made a bigger deal out of it than Sean. Sean didn't complain TF> about targeted ads, either; Dierk did. Dierk gave a good example of how such seeming

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hi, Jonathan Chattin wrote in msgid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] : > I'm always looking for a good book. Is there a particular title that > you recommend? Hobbes's Leviathan is not an easy read, but here it is: http://www.orst.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-contents.html I'm leaving this thre

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 17:53:09 +0700 Thomas Fernandez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hallo Jonathan, > > On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 05:15:23 -0500 GMT (21/11/02, 17:15 +0700 GMT), > Jonathan Chattin wrote: > > > Hmmm, I've never been very fond of the whole "Human Right" argument. > > To be honest it is fai

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Allie, On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 05:17:46 -0500 GMT (21/11/02, 17:17 +0700 GMT), Allie C Martin wrote: > Stick a pin. Sean wasn't actually complaining to Ritlabs. He asked > for a solution. I was replying to Dierk, who is using a "personal" version and made a bigger deal out of it than Sean. Sea

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Jonathan! On Thursday, November 21, 2002 at 11:15:23 AM you wrote: > Hmmm, I've never been very fond of the whole "Human Right" argument. To > be honest it is fairly silly. Nature doesn't guarantee anything. Nothing to do with Nature - whatever that should mean. Nature is in the best sense

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hallo Jonathan, On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 05:15:23 -0500 GMT (21/11/02, 17:15 +0700 GMT), Jonathan Chattin wrote: > Hmmm, I've never been very fond of the whole "Human Right" argument. To > be honest it is fairly silly. Nature doesn't guarantee anything. But the United Nations do. Human Rights are def

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 11:29:58 +0100 Markus Gloede <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Should you decide to do some more armchair philosophy, you might check > out Hobbes (not the Calvin kind) or Locke and whatthey have to say > about natural rights. :) > I'm always looking for a good book. Is there a pa

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thomas Fernandez [TF] wrote:' >> I wager then that it has nothing to do with the X-Mailer headers. TF> They just put it in, as a condition coming with the discount. I TF> don't even think they thought a lot about this. And here lies the real point I

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hi, Jonathan Chattin wrote in msgid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] : > Hmmm, I've never been very fond of the whole "Human Right" argument. > To be honest it is fairly silly. Nature doesn't guarantee anything. > Therefore it is somewhat irrational to assume that one has a right > to anything simply because on

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thomas Fernandez [TF] wrote:' TF> You have *no right* to a discount. The vendor decides when and TF> if they give you one. The vendor will also set the conditions. TF> If you don't like the conditions, don't take advantage of a TF> special discount. I

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 09:47:43 +0100 Dierk Haasis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [snip] > But none of that has anything to do with privacy. The main point is > that *I* decide what I want to give away and what not - nobody else. I'm going to butt in here. The point is that you *did* decide. You decided

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Allie, On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 04:49:28 -0500 GMT (21/11/02, 16:49 +0700 GMT), Allie C Martin wrote: TF>> Rit's alternative would have to be to discontinue student TF>> discounts, so you don't need to feel singled out. It is your TF>> choice to shut this door for people who do not mind singling

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Dierk, On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 09:47:43 +0100 GMT (21/11/02, 15:47 +0700 GMT), Dierk Haasis wrote: > But none of that has anything to do with privacy. Correct. Not even with this thread. > The main point is that *I* decide what I want to give away and what > not - nobody else. You have *no r

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thomas Fernandez [TF] wrote:' TF> Rit's alternative would have to be to discontinue student TF> discounts, so you don't need to feel singled out. It is your TF> choice to shut this door for people who do not mind singling TF> themselves out by applyin

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Thomas! On Thursday, November 21, 2002 at 8:24:39 AM you wrote: > A special discount is given for those who are in the educational field > *and* are not ashamed of it. If one of the two doesn't apply, why do > you want to take advantage of a special discount that is only given > when both c

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Sean! On Thursday, November 21, 2002 at 3:31:08 AM you wrote: > The 'educational' line in the x-mailer header gives out information > about me that some people would otherwise not know. It's not a huge > deal It *is* a big issue, as marketing people now know enough about you to make you pa

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Thomas! On Thursday, November 21, 2002 at 1:09:39 AM you wrote: >> Privacy has to be paid for? Privacy is only for the rich? > No, you get privacy for the normal price (irrespective of the fact > that we have determined that this matter has nothing to do with > privacy). There is no extra

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Sean, On Wed, 20 Nov 2002 20:31:08 -0600 GMT (21/11/02, 09:31 +0700 GMT), Sean wrote: TF>> No, you get privacy for the normal price (irrespective of the fact TF>> that we have determined that this matter has nothing to do with TF>> privacy). There is no extra fee for it. > The 'educational

Re:Student, Private, and Business versions

Wednesday, November 20, 2002, 6:09:39 PM, Thomas wrote: TF> No, you get privacy for the normal price (irrespective of the fact TF> that we have determined that this matter has nothing to do with TF> privacy). There is no extra fee for it. I unfortunately haven't had the time to participate in thi

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Dierk, On Wed, 20 Nov 2002 18:58:33 +0100 GMT (21/11/02, 00:58 +0700 GMT), Dierk Haasis wrote: >> No, I am suggesting that they pay the normal price if they are >> concerned about this. > Privacy has to be paid for? Privacy is only for the rich? No, you get privacy for the normal price (i

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Thomas! On Wednesday, November 20, 2002 at 5:45:11 AM you wrote: > No, I am suggesting that they pay the normal price if they are > concerned about this. Privacy has to be paid for? Privacy is only for the rich? As a professional cynic I like that ... specifically for Third World countrie

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Allie, On Wed, 20 Nov 2002 06:06:55 -0500 GMT (20/11/02, 18:06 +0700 GMT), Allie C Martin wrote: > But I guess, through this very same reasoning, one wonders, why fuss > at all over what other's might think about what they aren't seeing. > :) ACK. ;-) -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der d

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thomas Fernandez [TF] wrote:' TF> Assuming that recipients view this header. Come to think of it, TF> this header is shown on my computer, That's rare. Most clients will not show this without your specifically checking the headers for it. TF> but Jo

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hello Allie, On Wed, 20 Nov 2002 04:55:44 -0500 GMT (20/11/02, 16:55 +0700 GMT), Allie C Martin wrote: TF>> It doesn't help the recipients, but it helps marketing. If this TF>> is not clear, we would probably have to move to TBOT. However, I TF>> am referring to STP theory (segmentation, targetin

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Thomas Fernandez [TF] wrote:' The rest seemed like going in circles. However, you said this: TF> It doesn't help the recipients, but it helps marketing. If this TF> is not clear, we would probably have to move to TBOT. However, I TF> am referring to

Re: Student, Private, and Business versions

Hi Sean, On Monday, November 18, 2002 23:18 your local time, (Tuesday, 11:03 my local time), you [S] wrote: S> Oh, it's not really bad, otherwise I wouldn't still be at the S> university! But the "educational" line in TB! headers has S> occasionally caused people to assume that I am of 'college a

  1   2   3   >