Is anyone besides me getting a spam from Korea which you can't get rid of
it? Twice now I have received one, which, once clicked on to delete,
automatically sends you to a porno web site. Once there, there's no way to
get rid of it, at least not with my limited experience with computers.
Three times I just turned off the computer then waited while it did a
Scandisk to verify for errors. Out of frustration, I finally deleted the
Korea folder, which got rid of the email, then remade the Korea folder.
For the past year I've been shuttling the spam from Korea to a folder, where
I do a bulk delete to simplify getting rid of the unwelcome garbage. It
makes me wonder aloud why I didn't (and now don't) simply send them to the
deleted items file.

Can't speak for anyone else, but I'm about up to my ears with junk mail and
spam. So far as the phone goes, I no longer answer it. We screen the
calls with a message on our answering machine that tells friends to identify
themselves, and for solicitors to hang up, that we do not accept calls from
solicitors. It's surprisingly effective. Only about a half dozen
solicitors have talked to the machine in the past year or so. For the
most part, they comply by hanging up. Still, it's clearly a PIA to have to
resort to such tactics. Seems we, the law abiding citizens, have given up
all our rights so those that prefer to live outside the law are guaranteed
they collect all of theirs. I clearly do not see how anyone has the right
to disrupt my privacy, especially in an attempt to sell me aluminum siding,
for which I have absolutely no need.

At what point will the lawmakers pull their heads out of their asses?

Comments?

Harold

At what point will the lawmakers pull their heads out of their asses?

Comments?

Harold

NEVER. They don't want to hurt anybodys feelings. Have to be politicly
correct now.

But I agree with all you said Harold. As far as the phone calls go. It
depends on what kind of mood I'm in. If i'm realy ****ed off I answer the
phone in give them a hard time untill they hang up. On other occasions I
just let the machine answer. I don't think they'll ever go away. Only way to
do that is to hit them in their pocket book, don't buy their products.
Unfortunatly we have to many "minrods" that go for the sales pitch.
Hang in there, it's only going to get worse and your not alone in that boat.

Bernd

For your information, the UK has just past a law that anyone sending
unwanted emails will be subject to a $8000 fine, and the rest of Europe will
follow soon. The problem is how do you collect fine in Korea.
--
Donald Warner
--
"Harold & Susan Vordos" wrote in message
...
Is anyone besides me getting a spam from Korea which you can't get rid of
it? Twice now I have received one, which, once clicked on to delete,
automatically sends you to a porno web site. Once there, there's no way
to
get rid of it, at least not with my limited experience with computers.
Three times I just turned off the computer then waited while it did a
Scandisk to verify for errors. Out of frustration, I finally deleted
the
Korea folder, which got rid of the email, then remade the Korea folder.
For the past year I've been shuttling the spam from Korea to a folder,
where
I do a bulk delete to simplify getting rid of the unwelcome garbage. It
makes me wonder aloud why I didn't (and now don't) simply send them to the
deleted items file.

Can't speak for anyone else, but I'm about up to my ears with junk mail
and
spam. So far as the phone goes, I no longer answer it. We screen the
calls with a message on our answering machine that tells friends to
identify
themselves, and for solicitors to hang up, that we do not accept calls
from
solicitors. It's surprisingly effective. Only about a half dozen
solicitors have talked to the machine in the past year or so. For the
most part, they comply by hanging up. Still, it's clearly a PIA to have
to
resort to such tactics. Seems we, the law abiding citizens, have given up
all our rights so those that prefer to live outside the law are guaranteed
they collect all of theirs. I clearly do not see how anyone has the
right
to disrupt my privacy, especially in an attempt to sell me aluminum
siding,
for which I have absolutely no need.

At what point will the lawmakers pull their heads out of their asses?

Comments?

Harold

Harold & Susan Vordos wrote:

Is anyone besides me getting a spam from Korea which you can't get rid of
it? Twice now I have received one, which, once clicked on to delete,
automatically sends you to a porno web site. Once there, there's no way to
get rid of it, at least not with my limited experience with computers.
Three times I just turned off the computer then waited while it did a
Scandisk to verify for errors. Out of frustration, I finally deleted the
Korea folder, which got rid of the email, then remade the Korea folder.
For the past year I've been shuttling the spam from Korea to a folder, where
I do a bulk delete to simplify getting rid of the unwelcome garbage. It
makes me wonder aloud why I didn't (and now don't) simply send them to the
deleted items file.

Can't speak for anyone else, but I'm about up to my ears with junk mail and
spam. So far as the phone goes, I no longer answer it. We screen the
calls with a message on our answering machine that tells friends to identify
themselves, and for solicitors to hang up, that we do not accept calls from
solicitors. It's surprisingly effective. Only about a half dozen
solicitors have talked to the machine in the past year or so. For the
most part, they comply by hanging up. Still, it's clearly a PIA to have to
resort to such tactics. Seems we, the law abiding citizens, have given up
all our rights so those that prefer to live outside the law are guaranteed
they collect all of theirs. I clearly do not see how anyone has the right
to disrupt my privacy, especially in an attempt to sell me aluminum siding,
for which I have absolutely no need.

At what point will the lawmakers pull their heads out of their asses?

Comments?

Harold

Harold

Couldn't agree more. The legislatures and judges all seem to be the
puppets of corporations and special interest groups these days. The
general population is just fodder for all there marketing schemes, no
wonder we're all labeled as 'consumers'.

Prime example from the other day, some imbecile judge can say bothering
my privacy several times a day with a phone I pay for is free speech,
WTF! This after Congress actually did the unheard of and passed a law
,in 24 hrs no less, to allow do not call lists after some other judge
tossed them out on a technicality, unbelievable. If my next door
neighbor called me several times a day I could get an injunction against
him, maybe get him tossed in jail. Then the damn telemarketers hide
behind that 'throw old ladies and single moms out of work' bull**** and
I'm really ready to go ballistic. On top of that I'm actually expected
to be polite to these morons when they call in the middle of dinner, or
after I had to work all night and my sleep is interrupted. I suppose a
cure for the common cold would be suppressed because it would mean the
end of the cough syrup industry. It's time the average citizen took back
this country.

Ok, rant off...

Regards
Paul
--
-----------------------------------------
It's a Linux world....well, it oughta be.
-----------------------------------------

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 09:23:19 GMT, "Harold & Susan Vordos"
wrote:


Twice now I have received one, which, once clicked on to delete,
automatically sends you to a porno web site.

[extracted from the header of your message]
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158

The first thing you need to do is get a different
mail/news-reader program. As far as I know Outlook
Express is the only such program that executes things
like links and executable attachments when you have
only looked at the message.

I recommend Forte' Agent, myself, but there a lot
of other good mail/news-reader programs out there
like Eudora and Pine (available in DOS, Windows,
and Macintosh versions, I think). They won't show
you e-mail that looks like a web page, but that
is what you are complaining about: e-mails that
contain dangerous material over which you have no
control.

The downside is that you won't have the integration
available in the MS Office Suite: no addressbook
that contains e-mail addresses, phone numbers and
snail-mail addresses for use by various programs.

I sure wish MS would make a plain ASCII mail and
news-reader that integrated with the rest of Office.
Then, they could offer the choice of what program
you use to read mail -- the Outlook type that runs
executable attachments or the plain ASCII that protects
you from the sort of thing you are complaining of.

"Paul Batozech" wrote in message
...
Couldn't agree more. The legislatures and judges all seem to be the
puppets of corporations and special interest groups these days. The
general population is just fodder for all there marketing schemes, no
wonder we're all labeled as 'consumers'.

If people refused to be "consumers" by refusing to buy from
telemarketers and spammers, the problem would disolve by itself in 30 days.
We need to think of doing business with these slimeballs as a social "no
no", it is exactly like buying goods from a thief.


Prime example from the other day, some imbecile judge can say bothering
my privacy several times a day with a phone I pay for is free speech,

This I don't understand, nobody has a right of free speech on my
personal phone line except that which I decide to grant. If I say I don't
want to be called on my phone line which exists at my expense, I see no
Constitutional issue.

...
On top of that I'm actually expected to be polite to these morons when
they call in the middle of dinner, or
after I had to work all night and my sleep is interrupted.

Says who? I have never felt a duty of politeness to an unwanted
caller.

I suppose a cure for the common cold would be suppressed because it would
mean the
end of the cough syrup industry.

Franky, I will be happy to pay my part of the unemployment
compensation; it will be a bargain.


Ok, rant off...

Me too.

Regards
Vaughn

follow soon. The problem is how do you collect fine in Korea.
Declare it a rogue state and.....
Ciao,
David Todtman

"Harold & Susan Vordos" wrote in message
...
Is anyone besides me getting a spam from Korea which you can't get rid of
it? snip It
makes me wonder aloud why I didn't (and now don't) simply send them to the
deleted items file.

Can't speak for anyone else, but I'm about up to my ears with junk mail

For junk mail I keep all letters with a postage-paid return envelope. I
accumulate as much junk mail as I can stuff into the envelope as well as
junk faxes and send it back to them. Years ago, I would tape the letter to
a brick, but the post office will no longer accept anything attached to such
envelopes. Remember, they only pay postage when you return the envelope. I
used to carefully hide my name and stuff, or clip out the part of the letter
with my name on it -- but I found a better way. Send the form back with a
big red thing on it saying "REFUSED" and be sure to black out any signature
areas. Make sure you name and address is on the form. I found that by
doing this, I get my name off the mailing list in one hell of a hurry. It
has really cut down on the junk mail (with return envelopes) that I get.

and spam.

That's the tough one. The worst recently, has been all those bogus
"Microsoft Security" notices and undelivered mail notices (144K long,
typically). I go to my ISP web site and delete all them without opening or
downloading, but it still takes time. This has gotten so bad that I will
probably change my email address, my ISP, and start using an antiSPAM insert
like so may people do -- or
something. I assume that all you guys know never to click on the "click
here to remove your name from this list" -- that might get you off that SPAM
list, but it confirms that they hit a valid address and they sell that one
to all the other SPAMers.

So far as the phone goes, I no longer answer it. We screen the
calls with a message on our answering machine that tells friends to
identify
themselves, and for solicitors to hang up, that we do not accept calls
from
solicitors.

In Pennsylvania, we have a "Do Not Call" list which went into effect about a
year ago. Works great. I suppose that's the reason the telemarketers
pushed their case to kill the national telemarketing bill up to a
soft-headed judge -- he's got what he deserves -- thousands of telephone
calls (at dinnertime) from irate citizens. The telemarketers hope to push
it all the way up to the supreme court and to thereby invalidate the working
laws, such as Pennsylvania's. Before the PA law went into effect, here's
what I found was effective:

1. Just let them rattle on and on and on. If I'm at my desk and I get a
telemarketing call, I just put them on speaker phone and let them talk.
Eventually, they get to the point where they want a response -- the get
really ****ed off when you have wasted their time.

2. If I need to use the phone I get their name and telephone number and
then say "Congratulations -- you have called someone on the PA Do-Not-Call
list. You are subject to a $1,000 fine for this call of which I will get
$150. Thank you again for calling. "

I feel sorry for the (typically poor and/or desperate) people who
try to make a living making such calls. But maybe this will help to dry up
the potential employee pool, drive up the wages, and make telemarketing
unprofitable -- much better than more laws that clever lawyers can find a
way around.






At what point will the lawmakers pull their heads out of their asses?

Comments?

Harold

"Bernd" wrote in message
...
At what point will the lawmakers pull their heads out of their asses?

I forgot to note:
If 1/10 of 1% of all the SPAM was real:
I would be richer than Bill Gates, have a two foot penis, a perpetual
erection, and a long line sexy teenagers waiting for service.

Boris

If people refused to be "consumers" by refusing to buy from
telemarketers and spammers, the problem would disolve by itself in 30
days.
We need to think of doing business with these slimeballs as a social "no
no", it is exactly like buying goods from a thief.

Therein lies the rub. The term "people" is fuzzy. Most _do_ refuse, the
return on spam and telemarketing is really poor. It seems odd how
often we can flip between "the greater good" and "individual rights".

And those responsible for attributing "free speech" to the "do not call
list" seem to be confused. Those can say what they will, but why do
I have to be forced to listen? Caller-id is hardly 100% reliable. My work
requires that I answer the phone... Never mind. I'll just get more
angry.

Set your filters so that if it detects any of the myriad extended
characters (e.g. µ, Ò, §, ë, etc...) in the subject line, trash it.
Problem solved.

Tim

--
In the immortal words of Ned Flanders: "No foot longs!"
Website @ http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms

"Harold & Susan Vordos" wrote in message
...
Is anyone besides me getting a spam from Korea which you can't get rid of
it? Twice now I have received one, which, once clicked on to delete,
automatically sends you to a porno web site. Once there, there's no way
to
get rid of it, at least not with my limited experience with computers.
Three times I just turned off the computer then waited while it did a
Scandisk to verify for errors. Out of frustration, I finally deleted
the
Korea folder, which got rid of the email, then remade the Korea folder.
For the past year I've been shuttling the spam from Korea to a folder,
where
I do a bulk delete to simplify getting rid of the unwelcome garbage. It
makes me wonder aloud why I didn't (and now don't) simply send them to the
deleted items file.

Can't speak for anyone else, but I'm about up to my ears with junk mail
and
spam. So far as the phone goes, I no longer answer it. We screen the
calls with a message on our answering machine that tells friends to
identify
themselves, and for solicitors to hang up, that we do not accept calls
from
solicitors. It's surprisingly effective. Only about a half dozen
solicitors have talked to the machine in the past year or so. For the
most part, they comply by hanging up. Still, it's clearly a PIA to have
to
resort to such tactics. Seems we, the law abiding citizens, have given up
all our rights so those that prefer to live outside the law are guaranteed
they collect all of theirs. I clearly do not see how anyone has the
right
to disrupt my privacy, especially in an attempt to sell me aluminum
siding,
for which I have absolutely no need.

At what point will the lawmakers pull their heads out of their asses?

Comments?

Harold

In article ,
Harold & Susan Vordos wrote:
Is anyone besides me getting a spam from Korea which you can't get rid of
it? Twice now I have received one, which, once clicked on to delete,
automatically sends you to a porno web site. Once there, there's no way to
get rid of it, at least not with my limited experience with computers.

First -- don't use Outlook Express (which your headers say you
are using). It is the virus writer's friend, and the friend of spammers
who want to take control of your computer.

Second -- if you're considering using a web browser as an e-mail
program, get Mozilla and go though the edit/preferences/security and
edit/preferences/advanced menus, turning off things which you don't
*know* you need. In particular, turn off JavaScript for e-mail. That
is what allows the spammers to take control of your computer.

Three times I just turned off the computer then waited while it did a
Scandisk to verify for errors.

Bad practice. It can lead to sufficient damage to your disk so
you'll be forced to do a re-install. Just pull the modem line out of
the wall phone jack (if you're using a dial-up account), or disconnect
from your cable modem or other net connection. Then the spam can't
reach their web site, and will time out, allowing you to finally kill
it.

Out of frustration, I finally deleted the
Korea folder, which got rid of the email, then remade the Korea folder.
For the past year I've been shuttling the spam from Korea to a folder, where
I do a bulk delete to simplify getting rid of the unwelcome garbage. It
makes me wonder aloud why I didn't (and now don't) simply send them to the
deleted items file.

I use an e-mail program (mutt) which doesn't do HTML or
JavaScript. (Mutt is not available for Windows machines, so you are out
of luck with that one, but there are several good Windows e-mail
programs.

I also have blocked every IP address block from Korea which has
spammed me, along with a lot of China, Taiwan, Argentina, Brazil, and
quite a few other places. (But that requires control of your own mail
server, not too likely on a Windows box.)

I'm using a Bayesian filtering program to shuttle most spam to a
"purgatory" box.

I'm blocking receipt of any e-mail near 100K or larger. (Which
may block valid e-mail attachments, too, but it has shut off the flow of
the "Swen" virus, along with several others, all of which are larger
than my threshold.

I'm scanning e-mail not from mailing list for any of the
following strings in the body:

name=*.exe
name=*.bat
name=*.pif
name=*.scr
name=*.com
/iframe

and some others. Anything which matches one of those goes into a VIRII
folder.

Good Luck,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

My favorite thing to do with telemarketers is (if I have the spare time)
just listen to the sales pitch and sound interested as if I wanted to
buy their widgets or whatever they are selling. Then when they want a
credit card # tell them hold on while I go get my wallet. Just set the
phone down and continue with watching tv or eating dinner. It doesn't
take too long before they will give up.

There is also a web site where the author posted a clever script where
you start to turn the tables on the telemarketer and actually start a
conversation where you ask how long they have been doing this, etc. It's
a good bit of reading. If anyone wants, maybe I can dig it up. Mark

Harold & Susan Vordos wrote:
Is anyone besides me getting a spam from Korea which you can't get rid of
it? Twice now I have received one, which, once clicked on to delete,
automatically sends you to a porno web site. Once there, there's no way to
get rid of it, at least not with my limited experience with computers.
Three times I just turned off the computer then waited while it did a
Scandisk to verify for errors. Out of frustration, I finally deleted the
Korea folder, which got rid of the email, then remade the Korea folder.
For the past year I've been shuttling the spam from Korea to a folder, where
I do a bulk delete to simplify getting rid of the unwelcome garbage. It
makes me wonder aloud why I didn't (and now don't) simply send them to the
deleted items file.

Can't speak for anyone else, but I'm about up to my ears with junk mail and
spam. So far as the phone goes, I no longer answer it. We screen the
calls with a message on our answering machine that tells friends to identify
themselves, and for solicitors to hang up, that we do not accept calls from
solicitors. It's surprisingly effective. Only about a half dozen
solicitors have talked to the machine in the past year or so. For the
most part, they comply by hanging up. Still, it's clearly a PIA to have to
resort to such tactics. Seems we, the law abiding citizens, have given up
all our rights so those that prefer to live outside the law are guaranteed
they collect all of theirs. I clearly do not see how anyone has the right
to disrupt my privacy, especially in an attempt to sell me aluminum siding,
for which I have absolutely no need.

At what point will the lawmakers pull their heads out of their asses?

Comments?

Harold

Harold,

Are you using Outlook for email? If so, you may need to adjust the security
settings in Outlook.

From Outlook:

Tools | Options

then set secure content to "Restricted Sites" and then verify that all of
settings for executable programs are disabled or se to "Prompt" to prevent
them from running.

It's also a good idea to disable the Preview Pane, set Outlook so that it
only downloads headers and not message bodies and set it so that it does not
automatically acknowledge send receipts.

Note that the above is for Outlook 2002 and that I could be off base on some
of the above. It does seem to work for me, though, and I've been virus free
for several years now.

Hopefully someone will point out a site with a good FAQ or tutorial on
setting Outlook to be as secure as reasonably possible.

Mike

"Harold & Susan Vordos" wrote in message
...
Is anyone besides me getting a spam from Korea which you can't get rid of
it? Twice now I have received one, which, once clicked on to delete,
automatically sends you to a porno web site. Once there, there's no way
to
get rid of it, at least not with my limited experience with computers.
Three times I just turned off the computer then waited while it did a
Scandisk to verify for errors. Out of frustration, I finally deleted
the
Korea folder, which got rid of the email, then remade the Korea folder.
For the past year I've been shuttling the spam from Korea to a folder,
where
I do a bulk delete to simplify getting rid of the unwelcome garbage. It
makes me wonder aloud why I didn't (and now don't) simply send them to the
deleted items file.

Can't speak for anyone else, but I'm about up to my ears with junk mail
and
spam. So far as the phone goes, I no longer answer it. We screen the
calls with a message on our answering machine that tells friends to
identify
themselves, and for solicitors to hang up, that we do not accept calls
from
solicitors. It's surprisingly effective. Only about a half dozen
solicitors have talked to the machine in the past year or so. For the
most part, they comply by hanging up. Still, it's clearly a PIA to have
to
resort to such tactics. Seems we, the law abiding citizens, have given up
all our rights so those that prefer to live outside the law are guaranteed
they collect all of theirs. I clearly do not see how anyone has the
right
to disrupt my privacy, especially in an attempt to sell me aluminum
siding,
for which I have absolutely no need.

At what point will the lawmakers pull their heads out of their asses?

Comments?

Harold

Is anyone besides me getting a spam from Korea which you can't get rid of
it? Twice now I have received one, which, once clicked on to delete,
automatically sends you to a porno web site. Once there, there's no way
to
get rid of it, at least not with my limited experience with computers.
Three times I just turned off the computer then waited while it did a
Scandisk to verify for errors.

I don't know if I've gotten the same thing but I think I may know how it's
working and how to stop it. I use Outlook for email and Outlook Express for
newsgroups. In Outlook I've noticed a few messages lately that ask for a
receipt to be sent when I delete the message. I have an option set that
tells it to ask me before sending a receipt for when a message has been read
and it apparently works for deletion too because it asks me if I want that
receipt sent. I always say no so I haven't had what you're describing
happen to me but I'm guessing that you don't have that option set and the
return receipt is triggering the problem.

If you're using the latest version of OE here's how to set the the option:

Click on Tools and then Options and select the Receipts tab. There is a
section called
"Returning Read Receipts". Select "Notify me for each read receipt
request". Later on you can set it to "Never send a read receipt" if you
want but for now I'd leave the option in so you get a confirmation dialog to
verify that this is what's been happening.

I'm not sure this will have the same effect in OE as it does in Outlook but
I think so.

Best Regards,
Keith Marshall


"I'm not grown up enough to be so old!"

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 12:54:42 -0500, "Mike Henry"
wrote:


Hopefully someone will point out a site with a good FAQ or tutorial on
setting Outlook to be as secure as reasonably possible.


www.eudora.com
www.forteinc.com


Gunner, pondering the absolute refusal of some folks to change, even
when they know the drill motor they are using will shock the **** out
of them if they step in water. After all, its only injured 1,200,000
other people..so the odds are good it wont hurt me......

Shrug.......


"Anyone who cannot cope with firearms is not fully human. At best he
is a tolerable subhuman who has learned to wear shoes, bathe and not
make messes in the house."
With appologies to RAH..

In article , Gunner says...

Gunner, pondering the absolute refusal of some folks to change, even
when they know the drill motor they are using will shock the **** out
of them if they step in water. After all, its only injured 1,200,000
other people..so the odds are good it wont hurt me......

LOL. Like I say, correct procedure is to lift copy of
OE six inches up, shift three feet to the right, and
place copy of any one of the mentioned mail programs
in its place. Done!

Jim

==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at yktvmv (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"Donald" wrote in message
...
For your information, the UK has just past a law that anyone sending
unwanted emails will be subject to a $8000 fine, and the rest of Europe
will
follow soon. The problem is how do you collect fine in Korea.

NUKE EM' first. Then take what's left, if anything.

Bernd

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 09:25:16 -0400, Peter W. Meek wrote:
I sure wish MS would make a plain ASCII mail and
news-reader that integrated with the rest of Office.

They do, it is called Outlook Express 6. Just go to Tools,
Options, Read, and check "Read as plain ASCII text".
Problem solved.

While you're in there, go to Send, and uncheck "Reply
to messages in the format they were sent", and check
"Plain Text" in the mail and news sending format boxes.

Microsoft really does give you the capability to configure
their products to work the way you want. You just have
to dig a little to figure out how.

What would be great is if they'd ship them configured
with all the extraneous crap turned off by default. That
way you'd have to deliberately turn on the features that
can cause you grief instead of searching out the ways
to turn them off.

Gary

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 22:28:25 -0500, "Tim Williams"
wrote:

Path: newsspool2.news.pas.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas .earthlink.net!elnk-pas-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
From: "Tim Williams"
Newsgroups: rec.crafts.metalworking
Subject: Spam from Korea
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 22:28:25 -0500
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
Message-ID:
References:
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Complaints-To:
Lines: 14
Xref: news.earthlink.net rec.crafts.metalworking:527458
X-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 20:29:51 PDT (newsspool2.news.pas.earthlink.net)

"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
Gunner, pondering the absolute refusal of some folks to change, even
when they know the drill motor they are using will shock the **** out
of them if they step in water. After all, its only injured 1,200,000
other people..so the odds are good it wont hurt me......

Tim, standing in water, not experiencing any electric current


You will..its only a matter of time.

Gunner

"Anyone who cannot cope with firearms is not fully human. At best he
is a tolerable subhuman who has learned to wear shoes, bathe and not
make messes in the house."
With appologies to RAH..

John Hofstad-Parkhill scribed in
:

And those responsible for attributing "free speech" to the "do not
call list" seem to be confused. Those can say what they will, but
why do I have to be forced to listen? Caller-id is hardly 100%
reliable. My work requires that I answer the phone... Never mind.
I'll just get more angry.

like I said elsewhere, get a cheap walkman and a rampant preacher
tape, organ music, etc... play the tape to them when they call.
just say 'please hold' and go with the tape.....

swarf, steam and wind

--
David Forsyth -:- the email address is real /"\
http://terrapin.ru.ac.za/~iwdf/welcome.html \ /
ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML E-Mail - - - - - - - X
If you receive email saying "Send this to everyone you know," / \
PLEASE pretend you don't know me.

I've got OE 6 and it's there in:

Tools | Options | Read

"udie" udie.threethree wrote in message
...
I have OE 6, and there is no such option as "read in plain ASCII text". Do
you have a special version?

Steve.


"Gary Coffman" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 09:25:16 -0400, Peter W. Meek
wrote:
I sure wish MS would make a plain ASCII mail and
news-reader that integrated with the rest of Office.

They do, it is called Outlook Express 6. Just go to Tools,
Options, Read, and check "Read as plain ASCII text".
Problem solved.

While you're in there, go to Send, and uncheck "Reply
to messages in the format they were sent", and check
"Plain Text" in the mail and news sending format boxes.

Microsoft really does give you the capability to configure
their products to work the way you want. You just have
to dig a little to figure out how.

What would be great is if they'd ship them configured
with all the extraneous crap turned off by default. That
way you'd have to deliberately turn on the features that
can cause you grief instead of searching out the ways
to turn them off.

Gary


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.521 / Virus Database: 319 - Release Date: 9/23/03

Well, not mine!

--

Steve R.


"Mike Henry" wrote in message
...
I've got OE 6 and it's there in:

Tools | Options | Read

"udie" udie.threethree wrote in message
...
I have OE 6, and there is no such option as "read in plain ASCII text".
Do
you have a special version?

Steve.


"Gary Coffman" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 09:25:16 -0400, Peter W. Meek
wrote:
I sure wish MS would make a plain ASCII mail and
news-reader that integrated with the rest of Office.

They do, it is called Outlook Express 6. Just go to Tools,
Options, Read, and check "Read as plain ASCII text".
Problem solved.

While you're in there, go to Send, and uncheck "Reply
to messages in the format they were sent", and check
"Plain Text" in the mail and news sending format boxes.

Microsoft really does give you the capability to configure
their products to work the way you want. You just have
to dig a little to figure out how.

What would be great is if they'd ship them configured
with all the extraneous crap turned off by default. That
way you'd have to deliberately turn on the features that
can cause you grief instead of searching out the ways
to turn them off.

Gary


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.521 / Virus Database: 319 - Release Date: 9/23/03






---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.522 / Virus Database: 320 - Release Date: 9/29/03

Ok, my version must be older.

Steve R.


"Old Nick" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 18:14:14 -0700, "udie" udie.threethree
wrote something
......and in reply I say!:

Version 6.00.2800.1106 from the M$oft website.

Tools/Options/Read Check "Read all messages in plain text". Near
enough I think to the instruction below.

I have OE 6, and there is no such option as "read in plain ASCII text".
Do
you have a special version?

Steve.


"Gary Coffman" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 09:25:16 -0400, Peter W. Meek
wrote:
I sure wish MS would make a plain ASCII mail and
news-reader that integrated with the rest of Office.

They do, it is called Outlook Express 6. Just go to Tools,
Options, Read, and check "Read as plain ASCII text".
Problem solved.


************************************************** **************************
**************
Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
The rest sit around and make snide comments.

Nick White --- HEAD:Hertz Music
Please remove ns from my header address to reply via email
!!
")
_/ )
( )
_//- \__/


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.522 / Virus Database: 320 - Release Date: 9/29/03

On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 17:58:25 -0700, "udie" udie.threethree
wrote something
.......and in reply I say!:

Help/About. Tell us the answer. Let's get this show on the road and
stop to-ing and fro-ing.

This is the first version of OE _6_ that I have used. I do not know
whether they had this feature in 6.00.2800.1105 or whatever.

Ok, my version must be older.

Steve R.


"Old Nick" wrote in message

************************************************** ****************************************
Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
The rest sit around and make snide comments.

Nick White --- HEAD:Hertz Music
Please remove ns from my header address to reply via email
!!
")
_/ )
( )
_//- \__/

On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 08:08:44 +0800, Old Nick
wrote:

Trouble is, if you do this, if anyone sends you a simple message in
HTML, it shows an attachment, even though you can read the message
they sent in most cases. Bit of a PITA.

On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 09:25:16 -0400, Peter W. Meek wrote:
I sure wish MS would make a plain ASCII mail and
news-reader that integrated with the rest of Office.


Well, then (if you care to hear from them again)
tell them to send you plain ASCII or nothing.
I've dropped several newsletters that were
only available in HTML. I also dropped one
friend (put him in the killfile and told him
why). Told him to send snailmail if he had
to communicate in the future.

--
--Pete
"Peter W. Meek"
http://www.msen.com/~pwmeek/

On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 07:42:01 -0400, Peter W. Meek
wrote something
.......and in reply I say!:

Actually it's no biggy. I just was surprised to see this "attachment"
suddenly appear on a message, after I set the option.

On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 08:08:44 +0800, Old Nick
wrote:

Trouble is, if you do this, if anyone sends you a simple message in
HTML, it shows an attachment, even though you can read the message
they sent in most cases. Bit of a PITA.


Well, then (if you care to hear from them again)
tell them to send you plain ASCII or nothing.
I've dropped several newsletters that were
only available in HTML. I also dropped one
friend (put him in the killfile and told him
why). Told him to send snailmail if he had
to communicate in the future.

************************************************** ****************************************
Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
The rest sit around and make snide comments.

Nick White --- HEAD:Hertz Music
Please remove ns from my header address to reply via email
!!
")
_/ )
( )
_//- \__/

On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 16:50:17 -0700, "udie" udie.threethree
wrote something
.......and in reply I say!:

OK. Thanks. In was being a bit sarky. But I am amazed that M$oft made
a quite respectable change in a minor upgrade.

No wonder! my version is 6.00.2600.0000

Steve R.


"Old Nick" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 30 Sep 2003 17:58:25 -0700, "udie" udie.threethree
wrote something
......and in reply I say!:

Help/About. Tell us the answer. Let's get this show on the road and
stop to-ing and fro-ing.


************************************************** ****************************************
Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
The rest sit around and make snide comments.

Nick White --- HEAD:Hertz Music
Please remove ns from my header address to reply via email
!!
")
_/ )
( )
_//- \__/

When things get bad, I use the Linux boxen!

Steve R.


"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message
...
In article ,
udie udie.threethree wrote:

"Mike Henry" wrote in message
...
I've got OE 6 and it's there in:

Tools | Options | Read

Well, not mine!

Well ... looking at the headers from both of your articles, I
find:

} X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158

For Mike Henry, and

} X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000

for "udie".

.2600 vs .2800 seems to make the difference. (I wouldn't know for sure,
since I don't use OE for *anything*. :-)

So -- it seems to be time for "udie" to upgrade. Or really,
time for both to upgrade to something with fewer security holes, like
Forte's Agent, or perhaps Eudora.

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

"Mike Henry" wrote in message
...
I'm pretty sure the last virus I got was on a floppy disk from someone at
work and that was nearly 10 years ago. So far, no problems at all from
Outlook or Outlook Express, especially after implementing better security
procedures (internal to O & OE as well as external). That's just me,
though...

That makes two of us...

Come to think of it, our first and only virus attack was a recursive FAT
error that I'm pretty sure we got from a mischeveous computer geek
neighbor. ;-) And yup, from a floppy. (But those were the days when all
transferrin' was done with floppies. And floppies were still floppy..)

Tim

--
"That's for the courts to decide." - Homer Simpson
Website @ http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms

In article ,
Mike Henry wrote:

"DoN. Nichols" wrote in message

[ ... ]

I'm pretty sure the last virus I got was on a floppy disk from someone at
work and that was nearly 10 years ago. So far, no problems at all from
Outlook or Outlook Express, especially after implementing better security
procedures (internal to O & OE as well as external).

I presume that this includes installing the security patch from
Microsoft for OE?

That's just me,
though, and I don't have a problem with anyone else switching. I have far
too much archived with both to consider switching, especially as none of the
other email or newsreader programs seems to have any sort of decent transfer
facility. Been a while since I looked at the current market offerings,
though - do you know of any?

The problem is not the other programs, so much as the fact that
OE keeps the e-mail in a proprietary (and undocumented) format, and
that you allowed it to get hold of your e-mail before you considered
other programs.

All of the unix-based e-mail programs which I know keep e-mail
in plain-text files -- easy to import from or export to other programs,
including text editors, programs like "grep" to search for strings in a
file, and just about anything else you might want/need.

When a unix system stores mail, it goes into a "mailbox" format
file, which separates messages with a completely blank line (not even
any spaces), followed by a line starting with "From " (no ':' -- the
"From: " occurs later in the headers). And the end of the headers is
separated from the body by another entirely blank line. (The blank line
is represented in unix regular expressions as "^$", which means that
from the start of the line '^' to the end '$', there is nothing between
them.

I believe that Forte's Agent uses plain-text files, but I can't
run that program either, so someone else will have to verify this, or
deny it.

I don't have OE to allow me to look through the file format, so
I don't know how difficult it might be to write a program to strip it
out. But you might look for import tools for other programs (like
Forte's Agent), or conversion programs among the freeware.

If all else fails, look through the libraries available for
perl. You would have to install the language (free), and download and
install the necessary libraries (also all free) to support the ones in
question, but I'll bet that *someone* has written a perl program to
strip e-mail out of the file that OE keeps it in. (Perl is another
program which started in unix, but which has been ported to at least
Windows and Macs by those who know of its power.)

Good Luck,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

DoN. Nichols wrote:

That's just me,
though, and I don't have a problem with anyone else switching. I have far
too much archived with both to consider switching, especially as none of the
other email or newsreader programs seems to have any sort of decent transfer
facility. Been a while since I looked at the current market offerings,
though - do you know of any?

I recently switched to Polarbar for e-mail and I'm very impressed with
it. Each e-mail is a separate file with which you can do what you want
including stripping out attachments (e.g. JPEGs). It's free and written
in Java as a cross platform app. It's available for several flavours of
windoze as well as OS/2, Mac and, IIRC, Linux.

It also provides a preview mode which allows you to download only the
headers and first little bit of e-mails. You can then readily delete a
bunch of copies of Swen without having to download the whole thing.
(I'm on a dial-up.)

Ted

"Ted Edwards" wrote in message
...
DoN. Nichols wrote:

That's just me,
though, and I don't have a problem with anyone else switching. I have
far
too much archived with both to consider switching, especially as none
of the
other email or newsreader programs seems to have any sort of decent
transfer
facility. Been a while since I looked at the current market offerings,
though - do you know of any?

I recently switched to Polarbar for e-mail and I'm very impressed with
it. Each e-mail is a separate file with which you can do what you want
including stripping out attachments (e.g. JPEGs). It's free and written
in Java as a cross platform app. It's available for several flavours of
windoze as well as OS/2, Mac and, IIRC, Linux.

It also provides a preview mode which allows you to download only the
headers and first little bit of e-mails. You can then readily delete a
bunch of copies of Swen without having to download the whole thing.
(I'm on a dial-up.)

Not that it makes much difference, but I'm the guy that posted the bit you
quoted above, not DoN.

The question at the end the reply you quoted had to do with recommendations
for email or newsreading programs that could import archives from Outlook
and/or Outlook Express. Outlook already lets me preview headers without
downloading the message bodies so that feature is a non-starter for me. I'm
also not too thrilled with the idea of using Java-based programs.

But thanks for the thought :-)

On 13 Oct 2003 21:51:50 -0400, (DoN. Nichols)
wrote:
SNIP

I believe that Forte's Agent uses plain-text files, but I can't
run that program either, so someone else will have to verify this, or
deny it.

I don't have OE to allow me to look through the file format, so
I don't know how difficult it might be to write a program to strip it
out. But you might look for import tools for other programs (like
Forte's Agent), or conversion programs among the freeware.

SNIP

Agent's database contains pairs of files, one .DAT and one .IDX
file. There seems to be one pair of files per message folder. The data
files seem to be mostly plain text with some Agent specific fields
inserted before each message. Text search of the files is not a
problem. I have no idea how the index files work.

Agent will import from Unix type (RFC-822) message files and they
provide a utility to convert Eudora or Pegasus messges to Unix format.
It can export messges to text files, either Unix format or slightly
modified (custom message separators, optional header fields, etc.).

IMHO, Outlook Express' method of storing messages is a royal PITA.

BTW, here's a blurb on running Agent with WINE:
http://www.oliversampson.com/computer/#Agent

R,
Tom Q.

Mike Henry wrote:

I'm also not too thrilled with the idea of using Java-based programs.

Why? I'm still sitting on the fence on Java. Can you recommend a book
or on line source for an intro to the language?

Ted

the Sun java site has a good tech reference and all the free compilers,
runtime, etc -
"Ted Edwards" wrote in message
...
Mike Henry wrote:

I'm also not too thrilled with the idea of using Java-based programs.

Why? I'm still sitting on the fence on Java. Can you recommend a book
or on line source for an intro to the language?

Ted

"Ted Edwards" wrote in message
...
Mike Henry wrote:

I'm also not too thrilled with the idea of using Java-based programs.

Why? I'm still sitting on the fence on Java. Can you recommend a book
or on line source for an intro to the language?

I don't really have a good (or at least not a knowledge-based) reason for
not liking Java programs. I'm partly persuaded against them based on DoN's
dislike of Java-script activated on web pages but that probably doesn't have
anything to do with a stand-alone Java program. Then too, I'd guess that a
Java program must suffer at least a little speed loss since I believe that
it is essentially an intrepreted program. That may not make any difference
in actual practice of course. The issue of importing existing Outlook and
OE archives would still be a show-stopper for me, though.

On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:43:09 -0500, "Mike Henry" wrote:
I don't really have a good (or at least not a knowledge-based) reason for
not liking Java programs. I'm partly persuaded against them based on DoN's
dislike of Java-script activated on web pages but that probably doesn't have
anything to do with a stand-alone Java program. Then too, I'd guess that a
Java program must suffer at least a little speed loss since I believe that
it is essentially an intrepreted program. That may not make any difference
in actual practice of course. The issue of importing existing Outlook and
OE archives would still be a show-stopper for me, though.

Java was intended to be a portable language, and by embedding it in
browsers, a web enabled language. But there are stand alone interpreters
and *compilers* for it too. The latter remove any speed disadvantage
for Java programs.

Sun has a number of Java developer resources on the web. They also
have a newsletter, which I receive, for Java developers. It is full of tips
and program fragments. There are also a number of CDroms available
with interactive tutorials.

Microsoft offers an inexpensive compiler for a Java varient they call
J++. It has support for all the Windows GUI features built in. As usual,
it isn't 100% compatible with the actual Java language, but it can be
a good way to get your feet wet in Java programming.

Gary

In article ,
Mike Henry wrote:

"Ted Edwards" wrote in message
...
Mike Henry wrote:

I'm also not too thrilled with the idea of using Java-based programs.

Why? I'm still sitting on the fence on Java. Can you recommend a book
or on line source for an intro to the language?

I don't really have a good (or at least not a knowledge-based) reason for
not liking Java programs. I'm partly persuaded against them based on DoN's
dislike of Java-script activated on web pages but that probably doesn't have
anything to do with a stand-alone Java program.

Actually -- JavaScript has *nothing* in common with the Java
language other than the four letters in the name. It was so named by
Microsoft to try to ride on the coat-tails of Sun's introduction of Java
as a scripting language in web browsers.

Java (in browsers) is more secure than JavaScript, but both
suffer from the same basic security problem -- they download a program
from a remote site, and run it on your local computer, thus allowing
access to things which you might rather they not have access to -- such
as passwords you use to connect to your ISP. Yes -- the better
implementations try to control such access -- but in any complex system,
there are security holes, and I chose to deal with this by eliminating
the opportunity for such programs to run on *my* machine. I would much
rather that they run as CGI programs on the web server from which you
are viewing the page. This gives the authors of the programs more
incentive to control *precisely* what the programs are allowed to do,
since they are running on the *server*, not the viewing browser's
machine.

However, I have nothing against Java as a language -- though I
have not played with it yet, it is present on several of my *Sun*
machines. It even comes embedded in the suite of languages that the Gnu
C Compiler (gcc) can compile -- along with Fortran-77, c++, and (if you
really want it) Ada. :-)

Then too, I'd guess that a
Java program must suffer at least a little speed loss since I believe that
it is essentially an intrepreted program. That may not make any difference
in actual practice of course. The issue of importing existing Outlook and
OE archives would still be a show-stopper for me, though.

I've lost track of what this was originally about. As
mentioned, you can get java programs (both interpreters and compilers)
for many machines -- even for Windows, if you install the CygWin
package, which includes the Gnu C compiler (gcc) along with a lot of
other tools normally found on unix systems.

Oh yes -- this was about how to move messages archived in
Outlook Express to other MUAs (Mail User Agents), such as eudora,
Forte's Agent, and other such programs, just to get out from under the
thumb of Microsoft's proprietary format.

For that -- I would consider any language which made it
possible, as long as it did not have to run in a web browser. Probably
the best choice for this sort of thing would be "perl", which at the
beginning of the original man pages said that "perl" stood for
"Practical Extraction and Report Language", but at the end of the man
page in the "BUGS" section (All unix programs used to have a "BUGS"
section in the man pages -- sometimes used simply to list features that
the author of the program would like to add someday, sometimes to
document real bugs), it said:

"Don't tell anybody that I said this, but perl really stands for
'Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister'".

The "Pathologically Eclectic" part came from the fact that perl
included useful features from almost every language that the author had
used, including unix shells, "awk", "sed", "grep", (even) BASIC, and
Lord only knows how many others. :-)

I have seen an example (where I used to work) where someone took
a perl script and modified it to perform another task -- all the while
thinking that it was a shell script. :-) Essentially, programs in perl
tend to look like the writer's own favorite language.

It was written within the past fifteen years, and has grown
significantly, including tons of libraries to do all kinds of things.
One thing which I use it for is spam filtering, as there has been a very
good example of a Bayesian filter written in perl.

Enjoy,
DoN.
--
Email: | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---

Mike Henry wrote:

in actual practice of course. The issue of importing existing Outlook and
OE archives would still be a show-stopper for me, though.

I have no idea what an Outlaw Depress file looks like. Have you looked
at your files with something other than an M$ program? I don't know
what's available for 'doze but I examine "strange" files with either the
OS/2 system editor or ZTree. It's amazing what you can find out at
times! Netscape keeps all undeleted mail in one large file for each
"folder". I wrote an APL2 function to dismantle these into individual
messages and strip the irrelevent junk (to me) from the headers. These
are much easier to deal with.

Ted