| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 87207 | 2008-02-12 08:40:00 | Hate spammers? | Chilling_Silence (9) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 639753 | 2008-02-13 21:00:00 | Oh yea that's it! I must not understand.... that must be more anger coming out... Just as I thought - haven't got a clue!:waughh: |
Roscoe (6288) | ||
| 639754 | 2008-02-13 21:10:00 | Roscoe, did you even read my reply? Pay particular attention to the last paragraph. If you are going to *****, moan, and try to push your opinion on others, please at least make the effort to logically justify your point. And stop picking on people's spelling - while perfect spelling is nice, most people here do their best to be easily understandable. Before complaining about others' occasional spelling transgressions, go and fix your own grammar. Starting a sentence with a parenthesis is not proper English. Spelling 'lose' as 'loose' doesn't win you any points either. Dare I say that you are culpable with malice aforethought? Bletch: I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just pointing out what has worked well for me over the past two years.And trying to push it on everyone else. You say your system works for you - fine. It's unlikely to work for many other people, unless I completely misunderstand the way email works - not likely, since I have run mailservers for years. Either put up or shut up. I have no problems. I have no need for spam filters or anything of that ilk.Note the use of the word 'I' in the above sentence. Just because your method works for you does not automatically mean it will work for everyone else too. But personally, I fail to see the difference between reading your mail on or off line, even if you do have large volumes of mail.Go and compare the speed difference between a desktop mail client and a webmail client running in a browser. Also compare the extreme lack of configuration options that most webmail clients have compared to a desktop client. As an example, integration of a calendar and PGP/GPG are two features I use constantly - most webmail clients don't support either of these functions properly. (What a burden it is to be as popular, eh?;)) Most people these days have broadband and so are online continually.As do I. Just leave it on Hotmail or a third party. Can't see why it matters where you read it - large volumes or not.How do you feel about this after logging in/out ten times to check all your different addresses? Most webmail clients also don't let you work across more than one or two windows at once. I said that I only give my address to trusted family and friends, but what do I do for everything else, you ask? Usually Mailinator. Simple.Simple, but incredibly cumbersome. Exchanging work-related or list email via a one-shot webmail address isn't what I'd call a smart idea... Greg: Yes, I am aware that people do silly things like that but I also think, in most cases, that people are more aware these days, and don't do that as often as they did in the past. As you know, you often saw all the addresses in the "To:" line but that does seem to happen as much these days.Wanna bet? Maybe the people you correspond with don't, but if you think this practice has stopped you're only fooling yourself. It only takes one... If you have not included all the recipients in the "To:" line, but sent that email to more than one address, is that information to be found among the properties of the email?Yes. It'll be in either the Cc or Bcc header fields. More importantly, if someone forwards something that originally came from you, everyone who receives the forward will see your email address, in plain text, in the email body. And can someone harvest that?Yes. The Cc field can be seen by all recipients, and the Bcc field can be logged at the mailserver(s) the message passes through. |
Erayd (23) | ||
| 639755 | 2008-02-13 21:16:00 | Just as I thought - haven't got a clue!:waughh: I know exactly what it means - I'm sure Rob does as well. :lol: There is a thing called sarcasm, you seem to have great difficulty in discerning that from normal speech. You appear to think you're higher up the food chain then the rest of us for some reason...??? :illogical |
wratterus (105) | ||
| 639756 | 2008-02-13 21:19:00 | Just as I thought - haven't got a clue!:waughh: Lol! Your a funny person. |
rob_on_guitar (4196) | ||
| 639757 | 2008-02-14 03:46:00 | I know exactly what it means - I'm sure Rob does as well. :lol: There is a thing called sarcasm, you seem to have great difficulty in discerning that from normal speech. You appear to think you're higher up the food chain then the rest of us for some reason...??? :illogical He IS higher up isn't he? He's psychic! And its BS if he says that he dint say that. For eg. he knows I was going to say this so 1min after I post this, there will already be a rebuttal mocking me/us. |
beeswax34 (63) | ||
| 639758 | 2008-02-14 04:20:00 | come on guys, lets keep this on topic and avoid personal attacks. You know who you are, and it sounds like a few of you are having a bad day. Taking it out on other members is no cool, buy a punching bag or something. |
Jan Birkeland (4741) | ||
| 639759 | 2008-02-14 07:03:00 | (Spelling is not your forté either, I see.) wat |
roddy_boy (4115) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||