Hi Rafters!
It was a rhetorical question <g>.
...and I don't think any of us here are done learning. :O)
Yeah...tell me about it! ;-)))
I used to use OE's multiple identities to sort my e-mails. Any e-mails
I received would be downloaded but a copy left on the server so that
any for my mother could be later downloaded to her computer sitting
downstairs (she can't go upstairs). My main identity (on this computer)
could apply rules to delete from the server any e-mails to me, while still
retaining hers on the server. That way I could use her computer to get
her e-mail to her (her OE also left a copy on the server). My *other*
identity on the upstairs computer would be used to purge the server
of any collected e-mails.
Well...I can see your need to do so, but, I am the only one who uses my
computer, so for me it is not necessary to keep anything saved on the server
I don't need. The only time I might do this is if I am accessing my account
from the webmail from work or away from home, and may have reply or draft
that I want to save for later. But, that is a very rare case, and surely
does not include spam and Swen type visitors. 'Less I want a new sample. said:
The point here is that "delete from server" is not equivalent
to "do not download", and even so ~ Microsoft's allowing
you to choose an impossible scenario is typical Microsoft
behavior.
Oh..?? Well...I am beginning to see this as I go through the various Rules
and how they seem to relate to the different messages. It would seem that it
gives you a variety of choices, but, they don't all work as the wording in
the setups would suggest.
If it is deleted from the server, it will not be accessible via webmail
or through another computer using the same account. That is not to
say that it hasn't already been downloaded to the current client.
But, the e-mail body having met the criteria for the "do not
download" action is indeed, as you say, a little bit like having
the "do not open" instructions on the *inside* of the box.
True, and if indeed, as you, and a few others have said, that the message
*must* be downloaded before the Rule criteria can be applied, then the
'delete from server' action is a totally useless and misleading option.
People familiar with programming are quite used to the way
computers follow instructions even though they themselves
see those instructions as illogical. Perhaps they should have
programmed in a "greying out" of the "do not download"
action when it is determined that the criteria required it being
downloaded.
While the more experienced may well be knowledgeable of how the programming
is designed, and knows the holes that extemporaneous or even irrelevant
actions or Rules are presented, the majority, like myself, will simply that
these at face value and expect them to work accordingly. This can lead to
frustration, confusion and perhaps even the spread of these things as a
result.
Actually, upon reviewing the information presented here on this issue, I can
see that it would be better to let the message download and then deal with
it. At least that way you know that the action is actually taking place, as
you can see if the message is in the delete box, or if in the inbox, and you
can then delete it.
I think the e-mail filter rules work on the message in two basic
parts - the header - and the body. The "attachment" or "inline
content" of the message is only a part of the body (rfc822).
The server has information about file size, and probably can
reference that information by its internal "Message ID" string.
The filter can determine file size (by querying the server), and
can parse the downloaded header (for string matching), or part
of the body (for HTML or MIME clues), or download the whole
thing.
This could be true, but, with a good many of the samples that I have seen,
especially lately, there does not seem to be a whole lot of consistency in
the messages, as to working, size, headers, body, they are changing all the
time. It is like living in an apartment building where one tenant has
roaches. They stray into your apt, and you spray or bomb to get rid of them.
They go somewhere else, then, in a while, they are back at your place, they
just make the rounds of the safest host at the time. But, unless the whole
building is bombed, they will not go away. Even then, you can bring home 1
in a paper bag, or a bag of potatoes, etc, and then...it all starts over
again. All you can do is try to put out the Roach Motels, sprays, bait, etc.
and hope that they will be kept to a minimum. But, they do, and will come
back, no matter how clean 'you' are.
So then downloading implies deletion from the server anyway,
its default setting.
One *compound* rule, but lets not quibble. ;o)
Why stop now!! I'm just now beginning to understand what the peach fuzz
you're talking about..sheesh...I'm on a roll!!...;-)))
Okay, you just threw me off with that "attachment" and "delete"
post. This does seem simple enough. Just out of curiosity, have
you tried this?
As this thread (tome) has progressed, I have been trying various types and
combinations of Rules and actions along the way, but, always only one at a
time. Thus, yes, I can see that you may be reading more than one Rule from
post to post...but...you really must try to keep up...
Apply this rule after the message arrives
Where the From line contains 'M' or 'MS' or 'Microsoft'
Do not Download it from the server
followed by:
Apply this rule after the message arrives
Where the From line contains 'M' or 'MS' or 'Microsoft'
Delete it from server
'k...now, I have a really great opportunity here to test your suggestion. I
will be going out of town on Sat. and won't be able to access my e-mail,
and I will set the Rules and actions exactly as you have suggested. By the
time I return home a next Friday, there should be some significant data to
research how well it has/hasn't worked on these particular messages.
I'll post back, if you'll check back. Deal?? I mean, there will be no point
to post back to thin air.
You did, I was referring to the if "attachment" then "delete" rule
you mentioned.
Oh...that one...that was like..a while ago....>
I misunderstood which "one rule" you were referring to.
My error.
s'ok. One really does seem to be the loneliest number. But ..it's
