One time on Usenet, "MJB" <[email hidden]> said: > "Little Malice" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... > > One time on Usenet, "MJB" <[email hidden]> said: > >> "Omelet" <omp_omelet@g_mail.com> wrote in message > >> news:[email hidden]... > > > >> > Steve, I did not mind changing my munging a bit because the
odds
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
> >> > are, she is not the only one doing this. > > > >> She isn't > > > > I changed mine. I hope it helps... > > It's working. First time I've seen your posts on this server.
Well heck, I had no idea! I wondered why it seemed like I was being ignored more than usual. ;-)
Thanks for the report back...
I enjoy your posts,
Thank you!
Quoted message said:
and slogging through Google to read them is a *real* chore anymore. So, another "thank you"...
:-)
I knew you had sweet heart in there somewhere, Greg... ;-)
To paraphrase Bette Davis: "I'm the NICEST g*ddam man you could EVER meet...!!!"
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 18:14:30 GMT, Sqwertz <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
blake murphy said:
it's not *that* difficult. true, there are many, many things you can do that require some skill, but setting up, say, a rule to exclude any messages with more than two cross-posts is pretty easy. and that cuts out a lot of messages. i haven't seen dr. chung in ages.
The whole matter of redirecting ports and such may confuse non-techie users. The rule syntax can be daunting for non-techie users, as well.
But then again, if you thought OE was a browser-based mail and news client, then maybe I'm underestimating casual users ;-)
-sw
o.k., that last was foolish. but the instructions for setting up newsproxy are pretty clear and painless.
but, while we're almost on the subject, i seem to be unable to respond via e-mail to posts on this list (haven't tried on others). i don't think that *everyone* munges their e-mail address here. do you know the scoop on that? (my e-mail client is eudora.)
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 18:14:30 GMT, Sqwertz <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
blake murphy said:
it's not *that* difficult. true, there are many, many things you can do that require some skill, but setting up, say, a rule to exclude any messages with more than two cross-posts is pretty easy. and that cuts out a lot of messages. i haven't seen dr. chung in ages.
The whole matter of redirecting ports and such may confuse non-techie users. The rule syntax can be daunting for non-techie users, as well.
But then again, if you thought OE was a browser-based mail and news client, then maybe I'm underestimating casual users ;-)
-sw
o.k., that last was foolish. but the instructions for setting up newsproxy are pretty clear and painless.
but, while we're almost on the subject, i seem to be unable to respond via e-mail to posts on this list (haven't tried on others). i don't think that *everyone* munges their e-mail address here. do you know the scoop on that? (my e-mail client is eudora.)
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 18:14:30 GMT, Sqwertz <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
blake murphy said:
it's not *that* difficult. true, there are many, many things you can do that require some skill, but setting up, say, a rule to exclude any messages with more than two cross-posts is pretty easy. and that cuts out a lot of messages. i haven't seen dr. chung in ages.
The whole matter of redirecting ports and such may confuse non-techie users. The rule syntax can be daunting for non-techie users, as well.
But then again, if you thought OE was a browser-based mail and news client, then maybe I'm underestimating casual users ;-)
-sw
o.k., that last was foolish. but the instructions for setting up newsproxy are pretty clear and painless.
but, while we're almost on the subject, i seem to be unable to respond via e-mail to posts on this list (haven't tried on others). i don't think that *everyone* munges their e-mail address here. do you know the scoop on that? (my e-mail client is eudora.)
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 17:29:00 -0400, "Nancy Young" <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
"blake murphy" <[email hidden]> wrote
Quoted message said:
it's not *that* difficult. true, there are many, many things you can do that require some skill, but setting up, say, a rule to exclude any messages with more than two cross-posts is pretty easy. and that cuts out a lot of messages. i haven't seen dr. chung in ages.
I have quite a few rules. Seems to take a few versions of each one because the spammers know all about rules, too.
nancy
but you probably enjoy setting them up, at least to a degree. (a good thing, in my opinion.) but you don't really have to get into the guts of them to be useful. (i'm speaking of newsproxy here, but it applies to any rule-based scheme, really.)
excluding any message cross-post to more than x groups alone is worth the trouble, if your reader won't do that for you.
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 17:29:00 -0400, "Nancy Young" <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
"blake murphy" <[email hidden]> wrote
Quoted message said:
it's not *that* difficult. true, there are many, many things you can do that require some skill, but setting up, say, a rule to exclude any messages with more than two cross-posts is pretty easy. and that cuts out a lot of messages. i haven't seen dr. chung in ages.
I have quite a few rules. Seems to take a few versions of each one because the spammers know all about rules, too.
nancy
but you probably enjoy setting them up, at least to a degree. (a good thing, in my opinion.) but you don't really have to get into the guts of them to be useful. (i'm speaking of newsproxy here, but it applies to any rule-based scheme, really.)
excluding any message cross-post to more than x groups alone is worth the trouble, if your reader won't do that for you.
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 17:29:00 -0400, "Nancy Young" <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
"blake murphy" <[email hidden]> wrote
Quoted message said:
it's not *that* difficult. true, there are many, many things you can do that require some skill, but setting up, say, a rule to exclude any messages with more than two cross-posts is pretty easy. and that cuts out a lot of messages. i haven't seen dr. chung in ages.
I have quite a few rules. Seems to take a few versions of each one because the spammers know all about rules, too.
nancy
but you probably enjoy setting them up, at least to a degree. (a good thing, in my opinion.) but you don't really have to get into the guts of them to be useful. (i'm speaking of newsproxy here, but it applies to any rule-based scheme, really.)
excluding any message cross-post to more than x groups alone is worth the trouble, if your reader won't do that for you.
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 17:29:00 -0400, "Nancy Young" <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
"blake murphy" <[email hidden]> wrote
Quoted message said:
it's not *that* difficult. true, there are many, many things you can do that require some skill, but setting up, say, a rule to exclude any messages with more than two cross-posts is pretty easy. and that cuts out a lot of messages. i haven't seen dr. chung in ages.
I have quite a few rules. Seems to take a few versions of each one because the spammers know all about rules, too.
nancy
but you probably enjoy setting them up, at least to a degree. (a good thing, in my opinion.) but you don't really have to get into the guts of them to be useful. (i'm speaking of newsproxy here, but it applies to any rule-based scheme, really.)
excluding any message cross-post to more than x groups alone is worth the trouble, if your reader won't do that for you.
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 17:29:00 -0400, "Nancy Young" <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
"blake murphy" <[email hidden]> wrote
Quoted message said:
it's not *that* difficult. true, there are many, many things you can do that require some skill, but setting up, say, a rule to exclude any messages with more than two cross-posts is pretty easy. and that cuts out a lot of messages. i haven't seen dr. chung in ages.
I have quite a few rules. Seems to take a few versions of each one because the spammers know all about rules, too.
nancy
but you probably enjoy setting them up, at least to a degree. (a good thing, in my opinion.) but you don't really have to get into the guts of them to be useful. (i'm speaking of newsproxy here, but it applies to any rule-based scheme, really.)
excluding any message cross-post to more than x groups alone is worth the trouble, if your reader won't do that for you.
but, while we're almost on the subject, i seem to be unable to respond via e-mail to posts on this list (haven't tried on others). i don't think that *everyone* munges their e-mail address here. do you know the scoop on that? (my e-mail client is eudora.)
Most people don't use email addresses that can be directly "Reply"'d to. Or they use a completely bogus address. The email client you use doesn't matter.
"Sqwertz" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
blake murphy said:
but, while we're almost on the subject, i seem to be unable to respond via e-mail to posts on this list (haven't tried on others). i don't think that *everyone* munges their e-mail address here. do you know the scoop on that? (my e-mail client is eudora.)
Most people don't use email addresses that can be directly "Reply"'d to. Or they use a completely bogus address. The email client you use doesn't matter.
-sw
Although I don't hide my real name, I don't use my real email address here because I don't want a flood of unsolicited email from crooks and other creeps who lurk among these groups. I think spammers also use software to gather email addresses from news posts. If I want email replies from those genuinely interested in the subject matter of the group (rather than some crook who is trying to sell Nikes) I would disguise my address so at least the spammer's automatic tools would miss it .
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:49:56 GMT, Sqwertz <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
blake murphy said:
but, while we're almost on the subject, i seem to be unable to respond via e-mail to posts on this list (haven't tried on others). i don't think that *everyone* munges their e-mail address here. do you know the scoop on that? (my e-mail client is eudora.)
Most people don't use email addresses that can be directly "Reply"'d to. Or they use a completely bogus address. The email client you use doesn't matter.
-sw
i realize i was a little vague (and stupid) here. what i should have said is that even when it seems to be a legit email address, agent returns a '530 - authentication required' message when trying to e-mail. this is agent 1.92 *cum* newsproxy 1.21, so i'm guessing there is a miscommunication between the two. i don't know whether anyone here is using the two dinosaur programs in combination here or not. i've spent some time dicking around with it, but i can't figure it out.
i realize i was a little vague (and stupid) here. what i should have said is that even when it seems to be a legit email address, agent returns a '530 - authentication required' message when trying to e-mail. this is agent 1.92 *cum* newsproxy 1.21, so i'm guessing there is a miscommunication between the two.
That means you don't have your outbound mail server configured properly in Agent. It doesn't have anything to do with NewsProxy as it doesn't interact with email at all.
Make sure you have your mail server hostname (ie, outgoing.yahoo.verizon.net), username (ie, blakem), password (xyzPDQ) and port (usuall.y port 25) set the same as you do in your usual email client (assuming you use one).
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 20:09:42 GMT, Sqwertz <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
blake murphy said:
i realize i was a little vague (and stupid) here. what i should have said is that even when it seems to be a legit email address, agent returns a '530 - authentication required' message when trying to e-mail. this is agent 1.92 *cum* newsproxy 1.21, so i'm guessing there is a miscommunication between the two.
That means you don't have your outbound mail server configured properly in Agent. It doesn't have anything to do with NewsProxy as it doesn't interact with email at all.
Make sure you have your mail server hostname (ie, outgoing.yahoo.verizon.net), username (ie, blakem), password (xyzPDQ) and port (usuall.y port 25) set the same as you do in your usual email client (assuming you use one).
-sw
nope, mail server is correct. but i did notice i had it set to login required, so that prolly was it. will test it tomorrow when i re-start.
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 20:09:42 GMT, Sqwertz <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
Make sure you have your mail server hostname (ie, outgoing.yahoo.verizon.net), username (ie, blakem), password (xyzPDQ) and port (usuall.y port 25) set the same as you do in your usual email client (assuming you use one).
nope, mail server is correct. but i did notice i had it set to login required, so that prolly was it. will test it tomorrow when i re-start.
Most of the DSL providers require a login. Some of the Yahoo-DSL affiliates have moved to other ports for SSL email.
Usually that specific error message comes from using a mail server that is not yours.
On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 16:33:34 GMT, blake murphy <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 20:09:42 GMT, Sqwertz <[email hidden]>
Quoted message said:
blake murphy said:
i realize i was a little vague (and stupid) here. what i should have said is that even when it seems to be a legit email address, agent returns a '530 - authentication required' message when trying to e-mail. this is agent 1.92 *cum* newsproxy 1.21, so i'm guessing there is a miscommunication between the two.
That means you don't have your outbound mail server configured properly in Agent. It doesn't have anything to do with NewsProxy as it doesn't interact with email at all.
Make sure you have your mail server hostname (ie, outgoing.yahoo.verizon.net), username (ie, blakem), password (xyzPDQ) and port (usuall.y port 25) set the same as you do in your usual email client (assuming you use one).
-sw
nope, mail server is correct. but i did notice i had it set to login required, so that prolly was it. will test it tomorrow when i re-start.
thanks, steve.
your pal, blake
nuts, setting to no log-in required didn't work either.
