RE: [libreoffice-users] <OT>Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken

Richard,

Specifying Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org> messages as junk/spam
ON THE EMAIL SERVER will stop them from ever being downloaded!

Roland

On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 18:19 -0400, Richard wrote:

> Thanks.
> I do have a way to specify these messages as JUNK, and not even open them, BUT, they are still 
> downloaded before being rejected as junk, so I get all this garbage going thru my system before 
> the being dumped into the trash. $*#@*&*
> You get the idea.
> Thanks for your input, Roland.
> Richard
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roland Hughes [mailto:roland@logikalsolutions.com] 
> Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 4:23 PM
> To: users@libreoffice.org
> Subject: RE: [libreoffice-users] <OT>Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken
>
> Richard,
>
> If actual IT professionals set up the server correctly, you send a
> COMPLETELY EMPTY MESSAGE to users+help@libreoffice.org
>
> No SIG files, no subject, no message body.
>
> Given the organization of the Web site, and those genetic miss-fits from
> management that hang out here and speak directly out their rectal
> orifice without even the tiniest shred of knowledge...I would not be
> surprised to find out that doesn't work either.
>
> Management = genetic miss-fits promoted to their level of inability.
>
> Of course, you email system ought to provide a Web interface.  Open your
> browser without your email client being opened and go to that Web page.
> Find messages from 
>
> Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@libertytrek.org>
>
> and flag them as junk mail.  Do this on the server via the Web interface
> and it will stop gigs of useless bits from attempting to come down your
> dial up connection.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 13:31 -0400, Richard wrote:
>
> > HELP!!!!!!!!!!!
> > I am receiving 20 and more emails daily. I have tried many, many times to unsubscribe with NO 
> > SUCCESS.
> > PLEASE give me an email, land line, snail mail address, or phone number where I can UNSUBSCRIBE.
> >
> > richard@hornick.us
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joep L. Blom [mailto:jlblom@neuroweave.nl] 
> > Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 11:19 AM
> > To: users@libreoffice.org
> > Cc: Roland Hughes
> > Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] <OT>Re: Sun Weblog Publisher broken
> >
> > On 30/05/11 15:58, Roland Hughes wrote:
> > > Joep,
> > >
> > > Professional IT workers never remove any portion of the post because
> > > when you go through a SOX audit, and then through court, you get in a
> > > whole lot of trouble for doing it.
> > >
> > > Now, people who once got paid for writing a program or use Microsoft
> > > products may well have different opinions  since their not the ones
> > > working on multi-million dollar projects for Fortunate 500 companies.
> > >
> > > There is a long drawn out history of people deleting what they didn't
> > > read then denying things were said.
> > >
> > > Bottom posting wastes vast quantities of developers time scrolling to
> > > the end.  Full quoting is a policy mandated by most major corporations
> > > and IT organizations because it allows management (and the legal team)
> > > to jump into the conversation at any point.
> > >
> > > I wouldn't even be on this list had the Web site been designed by
> > > software professionals instead of whoever was used.
> > >
> > > On Mon, 2011-05-30 at 12:05 +0200, Joep L. Blom wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 30/05/11 08:45, Roland Hughes wrote:
> > > > > Neither bottom nor interleaved posting methods are used by professional
> > > > > IT workers.  Microsoft developers yes, but not professionals.
> > > >
> > > > Sigh! Roland your remark is utter nonsens. Many lists courteously
> > > > request to bottom post but also request clipping. Professional IT
> > > > workers remove unnecessary wording from replies and adhere to
> > > > courteously requested rules.
> > > > Joep
> > Roland,
> > Permit me to disagree. If you need E-mails for court representation it 
> > is best to furnish the original E-mails not the parts of text in answers 
> > to E-mails. You answer the relevant portions of an E-mail as the 
> > originator has the original text. I don't think a court will accept the 
> > umptieth repeat of an original E-mail. But I live in the Netherlands and 
> > I have no idea how convoluted American lawyers and justices actually 
> > reason. Well, that goes for Dutch members of that kind also. It is a 
> > breed that I, as a simple scientist, not understand so therefore your 
> > reasoning might be right.
> > Joep
> >
> >
> > -- 
> > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+help@libreoffice.org
> > Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> > List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
> > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
>
>
> -- 
> Roland Hughes, President
> Logikal Solutions
> (630)-205-1593
>
> http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
> http://www.infiniteexposure.net
>
> No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
> reserves.
>
> -- 
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+help@libreoffice.org
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


-- 
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593

http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net

No U.S. troops have ever lost their lives defending our ethanol
reserves.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+help@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted