On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 11:50:39AM -0400 or thereabouts, Chris Metzler wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:26:50 -0400
> "S.D.A." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 10:01:00PM -0700 or thereabouts, Rodney D. Myers
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Not according to Sylpheed. Both times he starte
...." where
> I won't see it any more.
Now all you have to do John if get them to fix the To: & Cc: problem.
From: John Summerfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 23:38:35 +0800
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Borked e-mail threading [W
On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 11:26:50 -0400
"S.D.A." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 10:01:00PM -0700 or thereabouts, Rodney D. Myers
> wrote:
>
>> Not according to Sylpheed. Both times he started new threads
>
> That's one of the reasons why I dropped Sylpheed early on!
Except I us
S.D.A. wrote:
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 10:01:00PM -0700 or thereabouts, Rodney D. Myers wrote:
Not according to Sylpheed. Both times he started new threads
That's one of the reasons why I dropped Sylpheed early on!
If one has an e-mail client that does real threading, which uses the message-
On Wed, Aug 25, 2004 at 10:01:00PM -0700 or thereabouts, Rodney D. Myers wrote:
> Not according to Sylpheed. Both times he started new threads
That's one of the reasons why I dropped Sylpheed early on!
If one has an e-mail client that does real threading, which uses the message-id,
then those m
5 matches
Mail list logo