On Sun, 2003-03-02 at 20:27, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 17:23, Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
> > On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 17:35, Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
> > > Hubert Chan wrote:
> > > >>"Joseph" == Joseph A Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [snip]
> >
> > Evolution supports filtering base
On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 17:23, Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 17:35, Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
> > Hubert Chan wrote:
> > >>"Joseph" == Joseph A Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[snip]
>
> Evolution supports filtering based on custom headers - has from back
> during the "Milestone" d
Craig Dickson was roused into action on 2003-02-27 01:50 and wrote:
[snip]
yourself and submit it)? As with the filtering question that started
this thread, improving your client (or replacing it with a better one)
is a better solution than demanding that the rest of the world bend over
backward fo
> Still, there is no reason to BCC the list. Not everyone has the ability
> to customize what their filters filter on (I'm sure there are more then
> a few Evolution and OE users on the list).
I'm an Outlook/pine/SquirrelMail user and instead of filtering
on each client, I do the smart thing and d
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph A Nagy Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Nick Hastings wrote:
snip>
>> Hmm? I agree that "reply to" should reply back to the origin of
>> the email. However the list is _not_ the origin of the email! The
>> original sender is the origin by definitio
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph A Nagy Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> --text follows this line--
>>
>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph A Nagy Jr
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > Actually, that Reply-to-list functionality can be i
Alvin Oga wrote:
On Thu, 27 Feb 2003, Nathan E Norman wrote:
Also, see http://incanus.net/~nnorman/sound/spam.au
and the rest of the spam sounds
http://www.Linux-Sec.net/Mail/spam.sounds/
mpeg samples for testing your sound/video/ra players
http://www.Linux-Video.net/Samples
c ya
alvi
On Thu, 2003-02-27 at 08:14, Clive Standbridge wrote:
> On Wed 26 Feb 2003 18:23:18 +(-0500), Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
> [...]
> > Old Netscape and versions of mail, Mail and
> > mailx that haven't been updated may well not be able to handle custom
> > header filtering as well,
>
> For the record,
Nick Hastings wrote:
Hmm? I agree that "reply to" should reply back to the origin of the
email. However the list is _not_ the origin of the email! The original
sender is the origin by definition.
That is true. The original sender is the origin by definition, but that
point of origin changes once
* Joseph A Nagy Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030228 14:21]:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >--text follows this line--
> >
> >>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph A Nagy Jr
> >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >
> > > Actually, that Reply-to-list functionality can be implimented on
> > > the l
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
--text follows this line--
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph A Nagy Jr
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually, that Reply-to-list functionality can be implimented on
> the list itself.
Not without breaking the original functionality of Reply to
I don't agree. I t
--text follows this line--
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph A Nagy Jr
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually, that Reply-to-list functionality can be implimented on
> the list itself.
Not without breaking the original functionality of Reply to
> Why list-masters d
On Thu, 27 Feb 2003, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> Also, see http://incanus.net/~nnorman/sound/spam.au
and the rest of the spam sounds
http://www.Linux-Sec.net/Mail/spam.sounds/
mpeg samples for testing your sound/video/ra players
http://www.Linux-Video.net/Samples
c ya
alvin
--
To UNS
On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 12:31:49AM +, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 02:51:29PM -0800, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> > Who is BCCing you? Is this a real person on this list or a SPAMMER. I
> > do get few strange BCC messages or bounce messages from SPAMMER. They
> > harvest addresses fr
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 02:51:29PM -0800, Osamu Aoki wrote:
> Who is BCCing you? Is this a real person on this list or a SPAMMER. I
> do get few strange BCC messages or bounce messages from SPAMMER. They
> harvest addresses from many places and send us a SPAM.
SPAM is a brand of meat. Unsolicit
On Thu, Feb 27, 2003 at 09:27:32AM -0600, Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
> Craig Dickson wrote:
>
> >is a better solution than demanding that the rest of the world bend over
> >backward for your defective software.
> How am I asking the rest of the world to bend over backwards?
>
> *shrugs* Doesn't matt
> "Mike" == Mike Dresser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
Mike> I prefer if people DO cc me, it's much easier to see that someone
Mike> replied to me, without having to remember what thread I was
Mike> talking in, and checking all the replies.
My MUA (gnus, if you're too lazy to check the h
Craig Dickson wrote:
is a better solution than demanding that the rest of the world bend over
backward for your defective software.
Craig
How am I asking the rest of the world to bend over backwards?
*shrugs* Doesn't matter. I made my complaint, suggestions were made, I'm
happy with the outco
On Wed 26 Feb 2003 18:23:18 +(-0500), Mark L. Kahnt wrote:
[...]
> Old Netscape and versions of mail, Mail and
> mailx that haven't been updated may well not be able to handle custom
> header filtering as well,
For the record, Netscape 4 does custom header filtering.
[...]
--
Cheers,
Clive
On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 07:18:46PM -0500, Mike Dresser wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, nate wrote:
>
> > I get cc'd or bcc'd on almost every post that someone replies to me, it
> > would be nice if people didn't do that but it's not a big deal to me.
>
> I prefer if people DO cc me, it's much easie
Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
> Actually, that Reply-to-list functionality can be implimented on the
> list itself. Why list-masters don't do this is so far beyond me that I
> don't even bother asking anymore
It's because that's the wrong place for it. If you put a Reply-To:
header in, then it's a p
Monte Milanuk wrote:
Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
Okay. I take that back. It appears that I can customize my filters.
Just noticed that.
Still, there is no reason to BCC the list. Not everyone has the
ability to customize what their filters filter on (I'm sure there are
more then a few Evolution an
Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
Okay. I take that back. It appears that I can customize my filters.
Just noticed that.
Still, there is no reason to BCC the list. Not everyone has the
ability to customize what their filters filter on (I'm sure there are
more then a few Evolution and OE users on the lis
Mike Dresser wrote:
On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, nate wrote:
I get cc'd or bcc'd on almost every post that someone replies to me, it
would be nice if people didn't do that but it's not a big deal to me.
I prefer if people DO cc me, it's much easier to see that someone replied
to me, without having to r
On Wed, 26 Feb 2003, nate wrote:
> I get cc'd or bcc'd on almost every post that someone replies to me, it
> would be nice if people didn't do that but it's not a big deal to me.
I prefer if people DO cc me, it's much easier to see that someone replied
to me, without having to remember what threa
> "Joseph" == Joseph A Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
Joseph> Still, there is no reason to BCC the list. Not everyone has the
Joseph> ability to customize what their filters filter on (I'm sure
Joseph> there are more then a few Evolution and OE users on the list).
I would assert that
Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
> Still, there is no reason to BCC the list. Not everyone has the ability
> to customize what their filters filter on (I'm sure there are more then
> a few Evolution and OE users on the list).
Evolution can't filter on arbitrary headers? Really? I wasn't terribly
impress
On Wed, 2003-02-26 at 17:35, Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
> Hubert Chan wrote:
> >>"Joseph" == Joseph A Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >
> > Joseph> Over the past few weeks, I've been recieving several pieces of
> > Joseph> mail directly to my inbox because users are Bcc'ing (for what
> >
Joseph A Nagy Jr said:
> Still, there is no reason to BCC the list. Not everyone has the ability
> to customize what their filters filter on (I'm sure there are more then a
> few Evolution and OE users on the list).
and there's not a lot of point in complaining either, since list members
come an
On Mit, 26 Feb 2003 at 15:32 (-0600), Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
> Over the past few weeks, I've been recieving several pieces of mail
> directly to my inbox because users are Bcc'ing (for what ever reason)
> the debian-user list. I would like to ask those people to please NOT bcc
> the list. If yo
Hubert Chan wrote:
"Joseph" == Joseph A Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joseph> Over the past few weeks, I've been recieving several pieces of
Joseph> mail directly to my inbox because users are Bcc'ing (for what
Joseph> ever reason) the debian-user list. I would like to ask those
Joseph> people
> "Joseph" == Joseph A Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joseph> Over the past few weeks, I've been recieving several pieces of
Joseph> mail directly to my inbox because users are Bcc'ing (for what
Joseph> ever reason) the debian-user list. I would like to ask those
Joseph> people to please NOT
Also sprach Joseph A Nagy Jr (Wed 26 Feb 02003 at 03:32:36PM -0600):
> Over the past few weeks, I've been recieving several pieces of mail
> directly to my inbox because users are Bcc'ing (for what ever reason)
> the debian-user list. I would like to ask those people to please NOT bcc
> the list
Joseph A Nagy Jr wrote:
> Over the past few weeks, I've been recieving several pieces of mail
> directly to my inbox because users are Bcc'ing (for what ever reason)
> the debian-user list. I would like to ask those people to please NOT bcc
> the list.
Bcc'ing a mailing list seems sort of odd,
Over the past few weeks, I've been recieving several pieces of mail
directly to my inbox because users are Bcc'ing (for what ever reason)
the debian-user list. I would like to ask those people to please NOT bcc
the list. If you must include the list, please place it in your CC or TO
field when
35 matches
Mail list logo
