On 13/04/2004, at 12:54 PM, Rod wrote:
On 13/4/04 12:34 PM, "Matthew Healey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A much better approach would have been to send a message to the
list-manager, or even one to the list stating: "My mail isn't getting
through." or to another member: "My mail isn't getting
On 13/4/04 12:34 PM, "Matthew Healey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> A much better approach would have been to send a message to the
>> list-manager, or even one to the list stating: "My mail isn't getting
>> through." or to another member: "My mail isn't getting through, can you
>> please forward
On 13/04/2004, at 12:20 PM, Onno Benschop wrote:
On Tue, 2004-04-13 at 14:04, BART RAFFAELE wrote:
There was are problem with the return server if you checked the date
i sent
the email test on the 2nd of April and didn't get a reply until 12th
of
April.
I did check the date and all of them
On Tue, 2004-04-13 at 14:04, BART RAFFAELE wrote:
> There was are problem with the return server if you checked the date i sent
> the email test on the 2nd of April and didn't get a reply until 12th of
> April.
I did check the date and all of them show that they were sent from the
WAMUG server on
I've heard it all before.
So lets all move on. ;-)
regards
Bart
--
From: BART RAFFAELE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 21:34:46 +0800
To: "WAMUG Mailing List"
Subject: FW: Test please ignore!
--
From: BART RAFFAELE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Although I am not concerned with the cost of email traffic, I agree
with Onno's opinion of test messages. One test message I can happily
ignore but multiple messages is going much too far. This is not the
first instance of such multiple test messages and
subscribers/potential subscribers should
On Tue, 2004-04-13 at 10:48, Peter Hinchliffe wrote:
> On 13/04/2004, at 4:18 AM, Onno Benschop wrote:
>
> >
> > ..let the flames begin..
>
> OK. I'll bite! Congratulations! Your response, all about the cost of
> email traffic to mailing lists, was absolutely breathtaking in its
> irony.
Noted
On 13/04/2004, at 4:18 AM, Onno Benschop wrote:
..let the flames begin..
OK. I'll bite! Congratulations! Your response, all about the cost of
email traffic to mailing lists, was absolutely breathtaking in its
irony.
Someone sends a couple of "innocent" (your quotes, not mine) test
messa
On Mon, 2004-04-12 at 23:34, BART RAFFAELE wrote:
> --
> From: BART RAFFAELE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 16:51:47 +0800
> To: WAMUG Mailing List
> Subject: Test please ignore!
While I completely understand your need to test your email and perhaps
to a lesser degree your l
--
From: BART RAFFAELE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 17:07:36 +0800
To: WAMUG Mailing List
Subject: FW: Test please ignore!
--
From: BART RAFFAELE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 16:51:47 +0800
To: WAMUG Mailing List
Subject: Test please ignore!
--
From: BART RAFFAELE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2004 16:51:47 +0800
To: WAMUG Mailing List
Subject: Test please ignore!
11 matches
Mail list logo
