On Tuesday, October 26, 2004 at 7:39:25 AM [GMT -0500], Perry Nelson wrote:
> Eureka! That did it. The message is now moved. :) Ok. I'm not surprised since the filter was so simple and really aught to work, provided the intended message actually gets to the filter. > However, that poses a question. Must all new filters be moved to the > top of the list? Not really. The key to controlling your filtering is to understand that each message is passed along the chain of filters starting from the one at the top of the filter list and working downwards. As soon as the message matches a filter, that matching filter takes the message, does it's thing with the message, and the message is *discarded from any further filtering* unless the matching filter has the 'continue processing with other filters' switch enabled. So if your filter isn't working, and you're sure it's correctly constructed, you have to wonder if some other filter has caught your message. Some other filter further up the filter list. So your new filter doesn't have to be at the top of the list if you know that the messages it's supposed to filter will not be caught by another filter. > FWIW, I reviewed all my filters and found I had a filter named "New > Rule" that had no conditions and no actions. I have since deleted > it, so maybe that was the source of the problem. I'm not sure how such a filter would work, if it would match messages even though no matching parameters/criteria were defined. > Thanks for your input. You're welcome. :) -- -= Allie =- ..... If at first you don't succeed, work for Microsoft. __________________________________________________ IMAP [ Client: The Bat!™ v3.0.1.33 | Server: MDaemon Pro ] OS: Windows XP Pro (Service Pack 2) ________________________________________________ Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
