info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: ghost email addresses in group lists [1/1]
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Paul Terry
Jan 20, 2012, 2:12:19 PM1/20/12
to
In message <rWzrMra5...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
>Has anyone else experienced this and know what to do about it?
Basically, your correspondent (or his ISP) has messed up his email
settings in a way that creates a loop back.
You could think of it as someone who has moved and who has asked Royal
Mail to redirect his mail from A to B. Unfortunately, he has also left
an instruction that anything sent to B should be redirected to A: so his
emails just go round and round in a loop between A and B without every
being delivered.
--
Paul Terry
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
>Has anyone else experienced this and know what to do about it?
Basically, your correspondent (or his ISP) has messed up his email
settings in a way that creates a loop back.
You could think of it as someone who has moved and who has asked Royal
Mail to redirect his mail from A to B. Unfortunately, he has also left
an instruction that anything sent to B should be redirected to A: so his
emails just go round and round in a loop between A and B without every
being delivered.
--
Paul Terry
Eileen Conn
Jan 21, 2012, 8:21:11 AM1/21/12
to
In message <LPDl32AT...@nospam.demon.co.uk>, Paul Terry
<ne...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
Thanks. This doesn't though explain why my Turnpike system is sending an
email to this address. It is not in the group list and no longer showing
in my address book. So that is a Turnpike matter I assume.
Which is why I was hoping someone here might have soem clues about why
that is happening. I copied and pasted the failure message in my earlier
post in case it revealed something of relevance to Turnpike.
--
Eileen Conn
<ne...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
email to this address. It is not in the group list and no longer showing
in my address book. So that is a Turnpike matter I assume.
Which is why I was hoping someone here might have soem clues about why
that is happening. I copied and pasted the failure message in my earlier
post in case it revealed something of relevance to Turnpike.
--
Eileen Conn
hugh
Jan 21, 2012, 1:52:35 PM1/21/12
to
In message <GBsQ54AH...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
You are using TP address book not windows :-)
I've used group lists and deleted individuals from groups without
problems AFAIK
--
hugh
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
>In message <LPDl32AT...@nospam.demon.co.uk>, Paul Terry
><ne...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>>In message <rWzrMra5...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
>><e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
>>
>>>Has anyone else experienced this and know what to do about it?
>>
>>Basically, your correspondent (or his ISP) has messed up his email
>>settings in a way that creates a loop back.
>>
>>You could think of it as someone who has moved and who has asked Royal
>>Mail to redirect his mail from A to B. Unfortunately, he has also left
>>an instruction that anything sent to B should be redirected to A: so
>>his emails just go round and round in a loop between A and B without
>>every being delivered.
>
>Thanks. This doesn't though explain why my Turnpike system is sending
>an email to this address. It is not in the group list and no longer
>showing in my address book. So that is a Turnpike matter I assume.
>
>Which is why I was hoping someone here might have soem clues about why
>that is happening. I copied and pasted the failure message in my
>earlier post in case it revealed something of relevance to Turnpike.
Have you checked global and personal address book?
>In message <LPDl32AT...@nospam.demon.co.uk>, Paul Terry
><ne...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>>In message <rWzrMra5...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
>><e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
>>
>>>Has anyone else experienced this and know what to do about it?
>>
>>Basically, your correspondent (or his ISP) has messed up his email
>>settings in a way that creates a loop back.
>>
>>You could think of it as someone who has moved and who has asked Royal
>>Mail to redirect his mail from A to B. Unfortunately, he has also left
>>an instruction that anything sent to B should be redirected to A: so
>>his emails just go round and round in a loop between A and B without
>>every being delivered.
>
>Thanks. This doesn't though explain why my Turnpike system is sending
>an email to this address. It is not in the group list and no longer
>showing in my address book. So that is a Turnpike matter I assume.
>
>Which is why I was hoping someone here might have soem clues about why
>that is happening. I copied and pasted the failure message in my
>earlier post in case it revealed something of relevance to Turnpike.
You are using TP address book not windows :-)
I've used group lists and deleted individuals from groups without
problems AFAIK
--
hugh
Eileen Conn
Jan 21, 2012, 3:01:33 PM1/21/12
to
In message <bPQKvSCz...@raefell.demon.co.uk>, hugh
<hugh@[127.0.0.1]> writes
email addresses.
Yes I am using TP address book.
Re-reading my previous attempts to describe this idea, they don't look
very clear. What is happening is that I send out an email to a group
list which this address used to belong to a long time ago. It doesn't
appear on that group list now, and doesn't appear in the address book
either, as it was deleted. In spite of that the email message comes back
saying it can't be delivered to that address. So something is going out
from turnpike when the group email is going out though it is not visible
in the list of email addresses.
--
Eileen Conn
<hugh@[127.0.0.1]> writes
>>Thanks. This doesn't though explain why my Turnpike system is sending
>>an email to this address. It is not in the group list and no longer
>>showing in my address book. So that is a Turnpike matter I assume.
>>
>>Which is why I was hoping someone here might have soem clues about why
>>that is happening. I copied and pasted the failure message in my
>>earlier post in case it revealed something of relevance to Turnpike.
>Have you checked global and personal address book?
>You are using TP address book not windows :-)
>I've used group lists and deleted individuals from groups without
>problems AFAIK
Yes checked both global and personal using the filter. I have over 6000
>>an email to this address. It is not in the group list and no longer
>>showing in my address book. So that is a Turnpike matter I assume.
>>
>>Which is why I was hoping someone here might have soem clues about why
>>that is happening. I copied and pasted the failure message in my
>>earlier post in case it revealed something of relevance to Turnpike.
>Have you checked global and personal address book?
>You are using TP address book not windows :-)
>I've used group lists and deleted individuals from groups without
>problems AFAIK
email addresses.
Yes I am using TP address book.
Re-reading my previous attempts to describe this idea, they don't look
very clear. What is happening is that I send out an email to a group
list which this address used to belong to a long time ago. It doesn't
appear on that group list now, and doesn't appear in the address book
either, as it was deleted. In spite of that the email message comes back
saying it can't be delivered to that address. So something is going out
from turnpike when the group email is going out though it is not visible
in the list of email addresses.
--
Eileen Conn
hugh
Jan 21, 2012, 3:55:50 PM1/21/12
to
In message <s6KqX1Gd...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
Suggest you create another e-mail to the group then have a look at the
list of addresses TP has created in the To field
--
hugh
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
list of addresses TP has created in the To field
--
hugh
vg4cysss7001
Jan 21, 2012, 4:32:57 PM1/21/12
to
In article <s6KqX1Gd...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>Yes checked both global and personal using the filter. I have over 6000
>email addresses.
Might it be that number has exceeded some maximum within TP? I
have 1,730 in my global address book, but have not sent to a group list
for several years.
Recalling some of your other posts, I believe you use these
facilities often. Had you recently increased the number of entries in
the group list? Again, IIRC there is something like a limit of 255 e-
mail addresses (in each of?) the To:, CC: and Bcc: fields. It would be
TP that does the 'unpacking' of the group list(s). Note also that some
servers impose a much lower limit, e. g. 20, on the number of intended
recipients as an anti-spam measure.
Does your group list contain one or more other 'nested' group
lists? (Though I note below that you say the address does not appear in
your address book at all.)
Have you tried re-building the address book? (I have a vague
recollection that removing an entry from the address book does not
actually delete it from the database for some reason - maybe to do with
flags.)
>
>Yes I am using TP address book.
>
>Re-reading my previous attempts to describe this idea, they don't look
>very clear. What is happening is that I send out an email to a group
>list which this address used to belong to a long time ago. It doesn't
>appear on that group list now, and doesn't appear in the address book
>either, as it was deleted. In spite of that the email message comes
>back saying it can't be delivered to that address. So something is
>going out from turnpike when the group email is going out though it is
>not visible in the list of email addresses.
That 'virtual' as the LH part of the e-mail address looks
interesting! I wonder why it was chosen :-)
The actual error message you quoted in your original post
suggests to me that your mail server is reporting some kind of a
'bounce' from the peckham.abelgratis.com server.
Do you have any other intended recipients at
peckham.abelgratis.com? I guessing that vir...@peckham.abelgratis.com
may no longer be a live/valid e-mail address and/or that there might be
some kind of 'out-of-office' reply business going on and/or that another
e-mail address at peckham.abelgratis.com has a forwarding to virtual@pec
kham.abelgratis.com?
As I said, only long shots, but a check in your address book for
[anything]@peckham.abelgratis.com may be enlightening and a rebuild
would do no harm.
--
Misha
Free on-line, off-site backups?
<https://mozy.com/?ref=UK45Y5>
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
>In message <bPQKvSCz...@raefell.demon.co.uk>, hugh
><hugh@[127.0.0.1]> writes
>>>Thanks. This doesn't though explain why my Turnpike system is sending
>>>an email to this address. It is not in the group list and no longer
>>>showing in my address book. So that is a Turnpike matter I assume.
>>>
>>>Which is why I was hoping someone here might have soem clues about
>>>why that is happening. I copied and pasted the failure message in my
>>>earlier post in case it revealed something of relevance to Turnpike.
>>Have you checked global and personal address book?
>>You are using TP address book not windows :-)
>>I've used group lists and deleted individuals from groups without
>>problems AFAIK
Sorry, all I can offer is 'long shots'.
><hugh@[127.0.0.1]> writes
>>>Thanks. This doesn't though explain why my Turnpike system is sending
>>>an email to this address. It is not in the group list and no longer
>>>showing in my address book. So that is a Turnpike matter I assume.
>>>
>>>Which is why I was hoping someone here might have soem clues about
>>>why that is happening. I copied and pasted the failure message in my
>>>earlier post in case it revealed something of relevance to Turnpike.
>>Have you checked global and personal address book?
>>You are using TP address book not windows :-)
>>I've used group lists and deleted individuals from groups without
>>problems AFAIK
>
>Yes checked both global and personal using the filter. I have over 6000
>email addresses.
have 1,730 in my global address book, but have not sent to a group list
for several years.
Recalling some of your other posts, I believe you use these
facilities often. Had you recently increased the number of entries in
the group list? Again, IIRC there is something like a limit of 255 e-
mail addresses (in each of?) the To:, CC: and Bcc: fields. It would be
TP that does the 'unpacking' of the group list(s). Note also that some
servers impose a much lower limit, e. g. 20, on the number of intended
recipients as an anti-spam measure.
Does your group list contain one or more other 'nested' group
lists? (Though I note below that you say the address does not appear in
your address book at all.)
Have you tried re-building the address book? (I have a vague
recollection that removing an entry from the address book does not
actually delete it from the database for some reason - maybe to do with
flags.)
>
>Yes I am using TP address book.
>
>Re-reading my previous attempts to describe this idea, they don't look
>very clear. What is happening is that I send out an email to a group
>list which this address used to belong to a long time ago. It doesn't
>appear on that group list now, and doesn't appear in the address book
>either, as it was deleted. In spite of that the email message comes
>back saying it can't be delivered to that address. So something is
>going out from turnpike when the group email is going out though it is
>not visible in the list of email addresses.
interesting! I wonder why it was chosen :-)
The actual error message you quoted in your original post
suggests to me that your mail server is reporting some kind of a
'bounce' from the peckham.abelgratis.com server.
Do you have any other intended recipients at
peckham.abelgratis.com? I guessing that vir...@peckham.abelgratis.com
may no longer be a live/valid e-mail address and/or that there might be
some kind of 'out-of-office' reply business going on and/or that another
e-mail address at peckham.abelgratis.com has a forwarding to virtual@pec
kham.abelgratis.com?
As I said, only long shots, but a check in your address book for
[anything]@peckham.abelgratis.com may be enlightening and a rebuild
would do no harm.
--
Misha
Free on-line, off-site backups?
<https://mozy.com/?ref=UK45Y5>
Eileen Conn
Jan 21, 2012, 7:18:46 PM1/21/12
to
In message <n+8oLeVJ...@spam.filter>, vg4cysss7001
<127@[127.0.0.1]> writes
where I have this ghost problem (wrongly called groups in my previous
emails).
> Recalling some of your other posts, I believe you use these
>facilities often. Had you recently increased the number of entries in
>the group list? Again, IIRC there is something like a limit of 255 e-
>mail addresses (in each of?) the To:, CC: and Bcc: fields. It would be
>TP that does the 'unpacking' of the group list(s). Note also that some
>servers impose a much lower limit, e. g. 20, on the number of intended
>recipients as an anti-spam measure.
>
I send out between 6-12 emails a month to the 1700. They are all in one
of 14 distribution lists and I join them together to form 8 emails, each
under 280 addresses.
> Does your group list contain one or more other 'nested' group
>lists? (Though I note below that you say the address does not appear in
>your address book at all.)
>
I don't think so but not sure I know what this means. But I have
searched many times with the filter on the global address book and found
nothing.
> Have you tried re-building the address book? (I have a vague
>recollection that removing an entry from the address book does not
>actually delete it from the database for some reason - maybe to do with
>flags.)
>
Yes I rebuild from time to time.
>I guessing that vir...@peckham.abelgratis.com may no longer be a
>live/valid e-mail address and/or that there might be some kind of
>'out-of-office' reply business going on and/or that another e-mail
>address at peckham.abelgratis.com has a forwarding to virtual@pec
>kham.abelgratis.com?
> As I said, only long shots, but a check in your address book
>for [anything]@peckham.abelgratis.com may be enlightening and a rebuild
>would do no harm.
>--
Thanks I have done all that many times and not brought up anything.
I am grateful for everyone's attempts to suggest solutions. Clearly this
is not an obvious Turnpike problem/solution. Sometimes the obvious
escapes me but it looks as if I have done most things to check this out.
It has happened with at least two other email addresses. I think the
other one still hangs around. A mystery - like ghosts...
--
Eileen Conn
<127@[127.0.0.1]> writes
>>Yes checked both global and personal using the filter. I have over 6000
>>email addresses.
> Might it be that number has exceeded some maximum within TP? I
>have 1,730 in my global address book, but have not sent to a group list
>for several years.
>
I should have said that only 1700 of these are in my distribution lists
>>email addresses.
> Might it be that number has exceeded some maximum within TP? I
>have 1,730 in my global address book, but have not sent to a group list
>for several years.
>
where I have this ghost problem (wrongly called groups in my previous
emails).
> Recalling some of your other posts, I believe you use these
>facilities often. Had you recently increased the number of entries in
>the group list? Again, IIRC there is something like a limit of 255 e-
>mail addresses (in each of?) the To:, CC: and Bcc: fields. It would be
>TP that does the 'unpacking' of the group list(s). Note also that some
>servers impose a much lower limit, e. g. 20, on the number of intended
>recipients as an anti-spam measure.
>
of 14 distribution lists and I join them together to form 8 emails, each
under 280 addresses.
> Does your group list contain one or more other 'nested' group
>lists? (Though I note below that you say the address does not appear in
>your address book at all.)
>
searched many times with the filter on the global address book and found
nothing.
> Have you tried re-building the address book? (I have a vague
>recollection that removing an entry from the address book does not
>actually delete it from the database for some reason - maybe to do with
>flags.)
>
>>
> That 'virtual' as the LH part of the e-mail address looks
>interesting! I wonder why it was chosen :-)
> The actual error message you quoted in your original post
>suggests to me that your mail server is reporting some kind of a
>'bounce' from the peckham.abelgratis.com server.
> Do you have any other intended recipients at
>peckham.abelgratis.com?
No - I search with the filter on abelgratis and there is nothing.
> That 'virtual' as the LH part of the e-mail address looks
>interesting! I wonder why it was chosen :-)
> The actual error message you quoted in your original post
>suggests to me that your mail server is reporting some kind of a
>'bounce' from the peckham.abelgratis.com server.
> Do you have any other intended recipients at
>peckham.abelgratis.com?
>I guessing that vir...@peckham.abelgratis.com may no longer be a
>live/valid e-mail address and/or that there might be some kind of
>'out-of-office' reply business going on and/or that another e-mail
>address at peckham.abelgratis.com has a forwarding to virtual@pec
>kham.abelgratis.com?
> As I said, only long shots, but a check in your address book
>for [anything]@peckham.abelgratis.com may be enlightening and a rebuild
>would do no harm.
>--
I am grateful for everyone's attempts to suggest solutions. Clearly this
is not an obvious Turnpike problem/solution. Sometimes the obvious
escapes me but it looks as if I have done most things to check this out.
It has happened with at least two other email addresses. I think the
other one still hangs around. A mystery - like ghosts...
--
Eileen Conn
Andy
Jan 22, 2012, 4:06:24 AM1/22/12
to
In message <s6KqX1Gd...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
[
might lay the ghost. BUT await others' comments on my idea, as it might
also do something unhelpful that I'm unaware of.
--
Andy Taylor [Editor, Austrian Philatelic Society].
Visit <URL:http://www.austrianphilately.com>
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
[
>Re-reading my previous attempts to describe this idea, they don't look
>very clear. What is happening is that I send out an email to a group
>list which this address used to belong to a long time ago. It doesn't
>appear on that group list now, and doesn't appear in the address book
>either, as it was deleted. In spite of that the email message comes
>back saying it can't be delivered to that address. So something is
>going out from turnpike when the group email is going out though it is
>not visible in the list of email addresses.
You could try first backing up then rebuilding your address book. That
>very clear. What is happening is that I send out an email to a group
>list which this address used to belong to a long time ago. It doesn't
>appear on that group list now, and doesn't appear in the address book
>either, as it was deleted. In spite of that the email message comes
>back saying it can't be delivered to that address. So something is
>going out from turnpike when the group email is going out though it is
>not visible in the list of email addresses.
might lay the ghost. BUT await others' comments on my idea, as it might
also do something unhelpful that I'm unaware of.
--
Andy Taylor [Editor, Austrian Philatelic Society].
Visit <URL:http://www.austrianphilately.com>
Andy
Jan 22, 2012, 4:08:26 AM1/22/12
to
In message <aIkH7qem...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
>In message <n+8oLeVJ...@spam.filter>, vg4cysss7001
><127@[127.0.0.1]> writes
[
><127@[127.0.0.1]> writes
>> Does your group list contain one or more other 'nested' group
>>lists? (Though I note below that you say the address does not appear
>>in your address book at all.)
>>
>I don't think so but not sure I know what this means.
A group, one of whose members is itself a group.
>>lists? (Though I note below that you say the address does not appear
>>in your address book at all.)
>>
>I don't think so but not sure I know what this means.
Eileen Conn
Jan 22, 2012, 10:00:32 AM1/22/12
to
In message <I+sRa7BQ...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk>, Andy
<an...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk> writes
regularly and export and save as a text file. Or do you mean something
else?
I also from time to time rebuild the address book and mailbase.
So have I already done what you are suggesting? Or is there something
else?
--
Eileen Conn
<an...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk> writes
>In message <s6KqX1Gd...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
><e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
>[
>>Re-reading my previous attempts to describe this idea, they don't look
>>very clear. What is happening is that I send out an email to a group
>>list which this address used to belong to a long time ago. It doesn't
>>appear on that group list now, and doesn't appear in the address book
>>either, as it was deleted. In spite of that the email message comes
>>back saying it can't be delivered to that address. So something is
>>going out from turnpike when the group email is going out though it is
>>not visible in the list of email addresses.
>
>You could try first backing up then rebuilding your address book. That
>might lay the ghost. BUT await others' comments on my idea, as it might
>also do something unhelpful that I'm unaware of.
Thanks Andy. By backing up do you mean taking a copy? I do that
><e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
>[
>>Re-reading my previous attempts to describe this idea, they don't look
>>very clear. What is happening is that I send out an email to a group
>>list which this address used to belong to a long time ago. It doesn't
>>appear on that group list now, and doesn't appear in the address book
>>either, as it was deleted. In spite of that the email message comes
>>back saying it can't be delivered to that address. So something is
>>going out from turnpike when the group email is going out though it is
>>not visible in the list of email addresses.
>
>You could try first backing up then rebuilding your address book. That
>might lay the ghost. BUT await others' comments on my idea, as it might
>also do something unhelpful that I'm unaware of.
regularly and export and save as a text file. Or do you mean something
else?
I also from time to time rebuild the address book and mailbase.
So have I already done what you are suggesting? Or is there something
else?
--
Eileen Conn
Andy
Jan 22, 2012, 11:03:56 AM1/22/12
to
In message <wZId$VEQSC...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
data files to elsewhere, preferably something physically separate like a
USB drive that you can put in a safe place.
You need to define for yourself which disasters you wish to protect
against and which not. Eg, it is relatively likely that your PC will
break down and ruin its drives, or be corrupted by a virus, or be
removed by a burglar, so a separate backup (regularly updated) is a Good
Idea. It is relatively unlikely that someone will break in to your
house, search your cupboards, and steal a small USB drive, so keeping it
elsewhere is probably unnecessary. And while the impact of a Jumbo jet
or a medium-sized asteroid would destroy both PC and backup, that is
unlikely to matter given its other consequences!
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
>In message <I+sRa7BQ...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk>, Andy
><an...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk> writes
>>In message <s6KqX1Gd...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
>><e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
>>[
>>>Re-reading my previous attempts to describe this idea, they don't
>>>look very clear. What is happening is that I send out an email to a
>>>group list which this address used to belong to a long time ago. It
>>>doesn't appear on that group list now, and doesn't appear in the
>>>address book either, as it was deleted. In spite of that the email
>>>message comes back saying it can't be delivered to that address. So
>>>something is going out from turnpike when the group email is going
>>>out though it is not visible in the list of email addresses.
>>
>>You could try first backing up then rebuilding your address book. That
>>might lay the ghost. BUT await others' comments on my idea, as it
>>might also do something unhelpful that I'm unaware of.
>
>Thanks Andy. By backing up do you mean taking a copy? I do that
>regularly and export and save as a text file. Or do you mean something
>else?
No, I meant doing a Windows-type File Copy of all the TP program and
>In message <I+sRa7BQ...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk>, Andy
><an...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk> writes
>>In message <s6KqX1Gd...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
>><e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
>>[
>>>Re-reading my previous attempts to describe this idea, they don't
>>>look very clear. What is happening is that I send out an email to a
>>>group list which this address used to belong to a long time ago. It
>>>doesn't appear on that group list now, and doesn't appear in the
>>>address book either, as it was deleted. In spite of that the email
>>>message comes back saying it can't be delivered to that address. So
>>>something is going out from turnpike when the group email is going
>>>out though it is not visible in the list of email addresses.
>>
>>You could try first backing up then rebuilding your address book. That
>>might lay the ghost. BUT await others' comments on my idea, as it
>>might also do something unhelpful that I'm unaware of.
>
>Thanks Andy. By backing up do you mean taking a copy? I do that
>regularly and export and save as a text file. Or do you mean something
>else?
data files to elsewhere, preferably something physically separate like a
USB drive that you can put in a safe place.
You need to define for yourself which disasters you wish to protect
against and which not. Eg, it is relatively likely that your PC will
break down and ruin its drives, or be corrupted by a virus, or be
removed by a burglar, so a separate backup (regularly updated) is a Good
Idea. It is relatively unlikely that someone will break in to your
house, search your cupboards, and steal a small USB drive, so keeping it
elsewhere is probably unnecessary. And while the impact of a Jumbo jet
or a medium-sized asteroid would destroy both PC and backup, that is
unlikely to matter given its other consequences!
>
>I also from time to time rebuild the address book and mailbase.
>
>So have I already done what you are suggesting? Or is there something
>else?
No, you have done the rebuild OK.
>I also from time to time rebuild the address book and mailbase.
>
>So have I already done what you are suggesting? Or is there something
>else?
vg4cysss7001
Jan 22, 2012, 4:29:43 PM1/22/12
to
In article <wZId$VEQSC...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
sufficient. For larger files, other methods maybe faster and/or result
in smaller backup files.
> I do that regularly and export and save as a text file. Or do you mean
>something else?
>
>I also from time to time rebuild the address book and mailbase.
I do it as often as I can after any significant amount of
activity, e. g. deleting e-mails with large attachments, possibly after
saving worthwhile attachments _outside_ of TP's database.
>
>So have I already done what you are suggesting? Or is there something
>else?
I don't think so, but I use a simple copy/backup of the whole TP
directory, rather than your export and save of the address book.
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
>In message <I+sRa7BQ...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk>, Andy
><an...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk> writes
>>In message <s6KqX1Gd...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
>><e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
>>[
[snip]
><an...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk> writes
>>In message <s6KqX1Gd...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
>><e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
>>[
>>
>>You could try first backing up then rebuilding your address book. That
>>might lay the ghost. BUT await others' comments on my idea, as it
>>might also do something unhelpful that I'm unaware of.
>
>Thanks Andy. By backing up do you mean taking a copy?
That is one way of backing up. For the address book it is
>>You could try first backing up then rebuilding your address book. That
>>might lay the ghost. BUT await others' comments on my idea, as it
>>might also do something unhelpful that I'm unaware of.
>
>Thanks Andy. By backing up do you mean taking a copy?
sufficient. For larger files, other methods maybe faster and/or result
in smaller backup files.
> I do that regularly and export and save as a text file. Or do you mean
>something else?
>
>I also from time to time rebuild the address book and mailbase.
activity, e. g. deleting e-mails with large attachments, possibly after
saving worthwhile attachments _outside_ of TP's database.
>
>So have I already done what you are suggesting? Or is there something
>else?
directory, rather than your export and save of the address book.
Eileen Conn
Jan 22, 2012, 6:42:16 PM1/22/12
to
In message <NoeCu6bH$HHP...@spam.filter>, vg4cysss7001
<127@[127.0.0.1]> writes
usually within a few weeks. I learnt the hard way about that and the 4GB
limit.
So the text file of the address book is a more frequent fast additional
way. The whole back up takes a few hours for Turnpike plus My Docs.
--
Eileen Conn
<127@[127.0.0.1]> writes
>>I also from time to time rebuild the address book and mailbase.
>
> I do it as often as I can after any significant amount of
>activity, e. g. deleting e-mails with large attachments, possibly after
>saving worthwhile attachments _outside_ of TP's database.
>
Yes I also save or delete attachments as soon as poss if no immediately
>
> I do it as often as I can after any significant amount of
>activity, e. g. deleting e-mails with large attachments, possibly after
>saving worthwhile attachments _outside_ of TP's database.
>
usually within a few weeks. I learnt the hard way about that and the 4GB
limit.
>>
>>So have I already done what you are suggesting? Or is there something
>>else?
>
> I don't think so, but I use a simple copy/backup of the whole TP
>directory, rather than your export and save of the address book.
That gets done about once every 5 weeks with the whole computer back up.
>>So have I already done what you are suggesting? Or is there something
>>else?
>
> I don't think so, but I use a simple copy/backup of the whole TP
>directory, rather than your export and save of the address book.
So the text file of the address book is a more frequent fast additional
way. The whole back up takes a few hours for Turnpike plus My Docs.
--
Eileen Conn
Eileen Conn
Jan 22, 2012, 6:47:04 PM1/22/12
to
In message <MDiA1ENs...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk>, Andy
<an...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk> writes
alternates. This is done about once a month for TP and My Docs.
>You need to define for yourself which disasters you wish to protect
>against and which not.
>Eg, it is relatively likely that your PC will break down and ruin its
>drives, or be corrupted by a virus, or be removed by a burglar, so a
>separate backup (regularly updated) is a Good Idea.
Yes protected against all these.
>It is relatively unlikely that someone will break in to your house,
>search your cupboards, and steal a small USB drive, so keeping it
>elsewhere is probably unnecessary.
Yes but have wondered about protect against fire - needs to be somewhere
else. But difficult to know where safe to keep it elsewhere. Richard
Branson lost a huge amount in his fire.
--
Eileen Conn
<an...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk> writes
>>Thanks Andy. By backing up do you mean taking a copy? I do that
>>regularly and export and save as a text file. Or do you mean something
>>else?
>
>No, I meant doing a Windows-type File Copy of all the TP program and
>data files to elsewhere, preferably something physically separate like
>a USB drive that you can put in a safe place.
>
Ah yes agree. Have back ups in both DVD and portable hard drive used as
>>regularly and export and save as a text file. Or do you mean something
>>else?
>
>No, I meant doing a Windows-type File Copy of all the TP program and
>data files to elsewhere, preferably something physically separate like
>a USB drive that you can put in a safe place.
>
alternates. This is done about once a month for TP and My Docs.
>You need to define for yourself which disasters you wish to protect
>against and which not.
>Eg, it is relatively likely that your PC will break down and ruin its
>drives, or be corrupted by a virus, or be removed by a burglar, so a
>separate backup (regularly updated) is a Good Idea.
>It is relatively unlikely that someone will break in to your house,
>search your cupboards, and steal a small USB drive, so keeping it
>elsewhere is probably unnecessary.
else. But difficult to know where safe to keep it elsewhere. Richard
Branson lost a huge amount in his fire.
--
Eileen Conn
Tony
Jan 23, 2012, 1:16:18 PM1/23/12
to
Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote on Sat, 21 Jan 2012 at
20:01:33:
sent message that has caused the problem? Or for it in the Connect log?
One or other of those might shed light on what's happening.
In TP, Tools, Search messages, To/CC: abelgratis, Search in: All email
messages should find *any* you've sent to addresses that include that
"word". I'd search separately on virtual, peckham, abel, luing as well.
BCC addressees won't appear in the headers of sent messages, though. But
they do show up in the Connect log.
To search the Connect log, you might first like to automatically save
log files. In Connect, Configure menu, Session Logging, choose Log but
expire after 7 days, choose a suitable path. After you've sent an email
that causes the problem, shut down Connect, use Windows Explorer to show
the folder whose path you chose above, then use Notepad to open the log
file; then Edit, Find, etc.
Regards,
--
Tony
20:01:33:
>What is happening is that I send out an email to a group list which
>this address used to belong to a long time ago. It doesn't appear on
>that group list now, and doesn't appear in the address book either, as
>it was deleted. In spite of that the email message comes back saying it
>can't be delivered to that address. So something is going out from
>turnpike when the group email is going out though it is not visible in
>the list of email addresses.
Have you searched for the offending email address in the headers of a
>this address used to belong to a long time ago. It doesn't appear on
>that group list now, and doesn't appear in the address book either, as
>it was deleted. In spite of that the email message comes back saying it
>can't be delivered to that address. So something is going out from
>turnpike when the group email is going out though it is not visible in
>the list of email addresses.
sent message that has caused the problem? Or for it in the Connect log?
One or other of those might shed light on what's happening.
In TP, Tools, Search messages, To/CC: abelgratis, Search in: All email
messages should find *any* you've sent to addresses that include that
"word". I'd search separately on virtual, peckham, abel, luing as well.
BCC addressees won't appear in the headers of sent messages, though. But
they do show up in the Connect log.
To search the Connect log, you might first like to automatically save
log files. In Connect, Configure menu, Session Logging, choose Log but
expire after 7 days, choose a suitable path. After you've sent an email
that causes the problem, shut down Connect, use Windows Explorer to show
the folder whose path you chose above, then use Notepad to open the log
file; then Edit, Find, etc.
Regards,
--
Tony
Tony
Jan 23, 2012, 1:22:48 PM1/23/12
to
Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote on Sun, 22 Jan 2012 at
23:47:04:
E.g. Mozy <http://mozy.co.uk/home/free/>. 2GB for free.
--
Tony
23:47:04:
>Yes but have wondered about protect against fire - needs to be
>somewhere else. But difficult to know where safe to keep it elsewhere.
Online.
>somewhere else. But difficult to know where safe to keep it elsewhere.
E.g. Mozy <http://mozy.co.uk/home/free/>. 2GB for free.
--
Tony
Andy
Jan 23, 2012, 2:06:50 PM1/23/12
to
In message <MSIcxi24...@hotair.localhost.invalid>, Tony
<tonyh1...@hotair.demon.co.uk> wrote
Hmmm. There's too many tales of "online repositories" suddenly vanishing
as their operators go phut, the possibility of which is mentioned in
their very small print.
And I'd need 200Gb not 2 - you'd be appalled at the size of readable
copies of the UPU Treaties, or of the instructions for operation of the
Austrian Posts after the Anschluss: they are not text but images of
hundreds of pages.
<tonyh1...@hotair.demon.co.uk> wrote
as their operators go phut, the possibility of which is mentioned in
their very small print.
And I'd need 200Gb not 2 - you'd be appalled at the size of readable
copies of the UPU Treaties, or of the instructions for operation of the
Austrian Posts after the Anschluss: they are not text but images of
hundreds of pages.
Tony
Jan 23, 2012, 2:46:19 PM1/23/12
to
Andy <an...@kitzbuhel.demon.co.uk> wrote on Mon, 23 Jan 2012 at 19:06:50:
>>Online.
>>
>>E.g. Mozy <http://mozy.co.uk/home/free/>. 2GB for free.
>
>Hmmm. There's too many tales of "online repositories" suddenly
>vanishing as their operators go phut, the possibility of which is
>mentioned in their very small print.
Sure, but the likelihood of that happening *at the same time* as a fire
>>Online.
>>
>>E.g. Mozy <http://mozy.co.uk/home/free/>. 2GB for free.
>
>Hmmm. There's too many tales of "online repositories" suddenly
>vanishing as their operators go phut, the possibility of which is
>mentioned in their very small print.
destroys your computer & local backups is much much smaller, and may be
small enough for most people.
>And I'd need 200Gb not 2 - you'd be appalled at the size of readable
>copies of the UPU Treaties, or of the instructions for operation of the
>Austrian Posts after the Anschluss: they are not text but images of
>hundreds of pages.
storage or pay heavily for online backup. But you may have other
important files amounting to less than say 50GB for which online backup
is feasible.
--
Tony
Wm...
Jan 24, 2012, 9:56:21 AM1/24/12
to
Fri, 20 Jan 2012 17:51:53 <rWzrMra5...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
demon.ip.support.turnpike Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
>This is the Postfix program at host luing.abel.net.uk.
>I'm sorry to have to inform you that the message returned below could
>not be delivered to one or more destinations.
>For further assistance, please send mail to <postmaster>
>If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your
>own text from the message returned below.
> The Postfix program
><vir...@peckham.abelgratis.com>: mail for peckham.abelgratis.com loops
>back to myself
>
>[ A MIME message / delivery-status part was included here. ]
>
>___________________________________________________________
>
>For a long time I have had a few email addresses in my Turnpike address
>book that were once on a group list but long since deleted from it. But
>when I send out emails on that group list a 'failure to deliver' message
>arrives in my inbox like the one above. Someone has suggested to me that
>this may be to do with Turnpike rather than the old email addresses.
>
>Has anyone else experienced this and know what to do about it? Do you
>need any more info to understand the issue?
The address may be being re-written somewhere along the way. e.g. you
send to ma...@contrary.invalid which gets passed onto
vir...@peckham.abelgratis which runs into a loop as Paul described.
I'd suggest
F3 to search
message text abel
tick include headers
search in all e-mail addresses
that will show you any messages that have been through or near
abel.net.uk or abelgratis.com that TP knows about from a header, quote,
etc
Also bear in mind that if something is deleted from the address book and
the address book is re-built and the address exists in an e-mail it gets
put back into the address book IIRC
--
Wm...
Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days
demon.ip.support.turnpike Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
>This is the Postfix program at host luing.abel.net.uk.
>I'm sorry to have to inform you that the message returned below could
>not be delivered to one or more destinations.
>For further assistance, please send mail to <postmaster>
>If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your
>own text from the message returned below.
> The Postfix program
><vir...@peckham.abelgratis.com>: mail for peckham.abelgratis.com loops
>back to myself
>
>[ A MIME message / delivery-status part was included here. ]
>
>___________________________________________________________
>
>For a long time I have had a few email addresses in my Turnpike address
>book that were once on a group list but long since deleted from it. But
>when I send out emails on that group list a 'failure to deliver' message
>arrives in my inbox like the one above. Someone has suggested to me that
>this may be to do with Turnpike rather than the old email addresses.
>
>Has anyone else experienced this and know what to do about it? Do you
>need any more info to understand the issue?
The address may be being re-written somewhere along the way. e.g. you
send to ma...@contrary.invalid which gets passed onto
vir...@peckham.abelgratis which runs into a loop as Paul described.
I'd suggest
F3 to search
message text abel
tick include headers
search in all e-mail addresses
that will show you any messages that have been through or near
abel.net.uk or abelgratis.com that TP knows about from a header, quote,
etc
Also bear in mind that if something is deleted from the address book and
the address book is re-built and the address exists in an e-mail it gets
put back into the address book IIRC
--
Wm...
Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days
Tony
Jan 24, 2012, 1:53:43 PM1/24/12
to
Wm... <tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote on Tue, 24 Jan 2012 at
14:56:21:
--
Tony
14:56:21:
>F3 to search
>message text abel
>tick include headers
>search in all e-mail addresses
>
>that will show you any messages that have been through or near
>abel.net.uk or abelgratis.com that TP knows about from a header, quote,
>etc
Except if it was entered in a BCC: field of a sent message, I believe.
>message text abel
>tick include headers
>search in all e-mail addresses
>
>that will show you any messages that have been through or near
>abel.net.uk or abelgratis.com that TP knows about from a header, quote,
>etc
--
Tony
Wm...
Jan 24, 2012, 1:35:11 PM1/24/12
to
Mon, 23 Jan 2012 18:22:48 <MSIcxi24...@hotair.localhost.invalid>
demon.ip.support.turnpike Tony <tonyh1...@hotair.demon.co.uk>
I'm inclined to agree, most important things are within 2GB
If you have more than that then you have specifics like Andy that should
be archived and shared.
demon.ip.support.turnpike Tony <tonyh1...@hotair.demon.co.uk>
If you have more than that then you have specifics like Andy that should
be archived and shared.
Eileen Conn
Jan 25, 2012, 12:20:09 AM1/25/12
to
In message <+9nBDGH3...@hotair.localhost.invalid>, Tony
<tonyh1...@hotair.demon.co.uk> writes
That's right
--
Eileen Conn
<tonyh1...@hotair.demon.co.uk> writes
--
Eileen Conn
Roy Brown
Jan 24, 2012, 5:09:01 AM1/24/12
to
In message <aIkH7qem...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writing at 00:18:46 in his/her local time
opines:-
>I am grateful for everyone's attempts to suggest solutions. Clearly
>this is not an obvious Turnpike problem/solution. Sometimes the obvious
>escapes me but it looks as if I have done most things to check this
>out. It has happened with at least two other email addresses. I think
>the other one still hangs around. A mystery - like ghosts...
ever encountered is in the Address Book file somewhere, albeit all of
those you don't see in the Address Book display should be flagged
deleted/unused by TP.
That's why the TP Addrbook file is rather bigger than the number of
visible Address Book entries might suggest.
So if TP has its knickers in a twist over this one address, it might be
indeed be in a 'ghost' state - visible to the Distribution List, but not
visible to you.
The idea posted above, to create a dummy message to the Distribution
List, but not to send it, and then to search it to see if the offending
address appears in it, should be effective. Though I think you will need
to export the email to a text file and then search that, as my TP
doesn't seem to want to search Headers with Edit on a specific email.
Or, as also suggested, you could search the whole mailbase, perhaps just
for a recent date range, including Headers in the search.
However, if you find it (or not!) what to do then?
My suggestion would be to:-
recreate this address, thus raising your phantom from the dead
add it to the Distribution List
rebuild the Address Book
remove the address from the Distribution List
delete the address again.
And if what we surmise is the problem here is indeed so, perhaps TP will
flag it as deleted, properly, this time.
You never know your luck....
Roy
--
Roy Brown 'Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be
Kelmscott Ltd useful, or believe to be beautiful' William Morris
Wm...
Jan 26, 2012, 11:50:17 AM1/26/12
to
Wed, 25 Jan 2012 05:20:09 <59efWo5J...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
demon.ip.support.turnpike Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
I don't think that is significant as the question then would be how it
got to be in one of Eileen's *outward* *bound* list of addresses. She
(or TP) must have seen it at some point to add it to a list.
Eileen: I presume you have tried
Address book
View
Filter
Show person entries for which there are no filed messages
and stripped the obvious. Otherwise you are getting into a binary split
situation.
Anyone have any idea how deeply TP nests lists?
demon.ip.support.turnpike Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
got to be in one of Eileen's *outward* *bound* list of addresses. She
(or TP) must have seen it at some point to add it to a list.
Eileen: I presume you have tried
Address book
View
Filter
Show person entries for which there are no filed messages
and stripped the obvious. Otherwise you are getting into a binary split
situation.
Anyone have any idea how deeply TP nests lists?
Wm...
Jan 26, 2012, 12:18:30 PM1/26/12
to
Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:39:01 <+av9iiF9MoHPFw5T@x.x>
demon.ip.support.turnpike Roy Brown
<Roy_now_fre...@acanthus.demon.co.uk>
>So if TP has its knickers in a twist over this one address, it might be
>indeed be in a 'ghost' state - visible to the Distribution List, but
>not visible to you.
... but visible to TP in the list as an outgoing entity possibly
re-written before the abel return.
>The idea posted above, to create a dummy message to the Distribution
>List, but not to send it, and then to search it to see if the offending
>address appears in it, should be effective. Though I think you will
>need to export the email to a text file and then search that, as my TP
>doesn't seem to want to search Headers with Edit on a specific email.
>Or, as also suggested, you could search the whole mailbase, perhaps
>just for a recent date range, including Headers in the search.
These are suggestions that help if the address on Eileen's list hasn't
gone AWOL (no subs paid / temp address / bounced because no longer
interested / etc).
TP's address book lists were never intended as outbound list management
tools. Come to think of it, I use social networking for that sort of
thing nowadays. If I wanted to set up a proper mailing list I wouldn't
choose TP, my small lists are essentially redundant now. I suspect
Eileen's dependence on "one way of working" might be the broader issue.
>However, if you find it (or not!) what to do then?
>
>My suggestion would be to:-
> recreate this address, thus raising your phantom from the dead
> add it to the Distribution List
it has to be there already unless Eileen has broken one of the unit or
space rules [1]
> rebuild the Address Book
> remove the address from the Distribution List
> delete the address again.
>
>And if what we surmise is the problem here is indeed so, perhaps TP
>will flag it as deleted, properly, this time.
I can't see it being that, TP knows about addresses in the address book
for which it has no messages.
>You never know your luck....
True.
[1] I think someone touched on the unit / space rules earlier, they can
be tricky to sort out [2]
[2] Eileen: unit / space rules are where the allowed space or number of
something (e.g. addresses) or the space or number allowed for them is
exceeded. It is possible you have inadvertently broken a limit as your
lists are larger than most. If this has happened, I think you'll have
to do the splits ... of your address book.
demon.ip.support.turnpike Roy Brown
<Roy_now_fre...@acanthus.demon.co.uk>
>So if TP has its knickers in a twist over this one address, it might be
>indeed be in a 'ghost' state - visible to the Distribution List, but
>not visible to you.
re-written before the abel return.
>The idea posted above, to create a dummy message to the Distribution
>List, but not to send it, and then to search it to see if the offending
>address appears in it, should be effective. Though I think you will
>need to export the email to a text file and then search that, as my TP
>doesn't seem to want to search Headers with Edit on a specific email.
>Or, as also suggested, you could search the whole mailbase, perhaps
>just for a recent date range, including Headers in the search.
gone AWOL (no subs paid / temp address / bounced because no longer
interested / etc).
TP's address book lists were never intended as outbound list management
tools. Come to think of it, I use social networking for that sort of
thing nowadays. If I wanted to set up a proper mailing list I wouldn't
choose TP, my small lists are essentially redundant now. I suspect
Eileen's dependence on "one way of working" might be the broader issue.
>However, if you find it (or not!) what to do then?
>
>My suggestion would be to:-
> recreate this address, thus raising your phantom from the dead
> add it to the Distribution List
space rules [1]
> rebuild the Address Book
> remove the address from the Distribution List
> delete the address again.
>
>And if what we surmise is the problem here is indeed so, perhaps TP
>will flag it as deleted, properly, this time.
for which it has no messages.
>You never know your luck....
[1] I think someone touched on the unit / space rules earlier, they can
be tricky to sort out [2]
[2] Eileen: unit / space rules are where the allowed space or number of
something (e.g. addresses) or the space or number allowed for them is
exceeded. It is possible you have inadvertently broken a limit as your
lists are larger than most. If this has happened, I think you'll have
to do the splits ... of your address book.
vg4cysss7001
Jan 26, 2012, 2:28:19 AM1/26/12
to
In article <MSIcxi24...@hotair.localhost.invalid>, Tony <tonyh1nosp
a...@hotair.demon.co.uk> writes
Snap! See .sig, though lack of bandwidth has limited my use of
it recently :-(
a...@hotair.demon.co.uk> writes
it recently :-(
Eileen Conn
Jan 27, 2012, 9:52:53 PM1/27/12
to
In message <IYwegrGJRYIPFwnG@[127.0.0.1]>, Wm...
<tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writes
'Show person entries for which there are no filed messages'
How do I filter for that? I know only filtering on part of the address
to find that.
--
Eileen Conn
<tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writes
>Eileen: I presume you have tried
>
>Address book
>View
>Filter
>Show person entries for which there are no filed messages
Yes thanks, done this up to last line:
>
>Address book
>View
>Filter
>Show person entries for which there are no filed messages
'Show person entries for which there are no filed messages'
How do I filter for that? I know only filtering on part of the address
to find that.
--
Eileen Conn
Wm...
Jan 28, 2012, 3:12:20 AM1/28/12
to
Sat, 28 Jan 2012 02:52:53 <a4iHXHTF...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
demon.ip.support.turnpike Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
I can't remember when it was introduced, it is definitely there in
TP6.07M but possibly not TP6.05S which you are using.
I know you are wary of change but the upgrade from 6.05 to 6.07 really
should be painless and you now have a reason to do it.
You are well liked in this ng and people clearly want to help you but it
is tricky if you aren't using the same version as most of the people
trying to help you. Apols if that seems a bit firm.
All: was the show person entries for which there are no filed messages
not in 6.05?
All: Why does Eileen have an S not M license? Was that part of 6.07 too?
demon.ip.support.turnpike Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
TP6.07M but possibly not TP6.05S which you are using.
I know you are wary of change but the upgrade from 6.05 to 6.07 really
should be painless and you now have a reason to do it.
You are well liked in this ng and people clearly want to help you but it
is tricky if you aren't using the same version as most of the people
trying to help you. Apols if that seems a bit firm.
All: was the show person entries for which there are no filed messages
not in 6.05?
All: Why does Eileen have an S not M license? Was that part of 6.07 too?
Paul Terry
Jan 28, 2012, 4:06:13 AM1/28/12
to
In message <a4iHXHTF...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
>Yes thanks, done this up to last line:
>'Show person entries for which there are no filed messages'
>
>How do I filter for that? I know only filtering on part of the address
>to find that.
It's the last option in the Filter dialog (just above the OK button).
--
Paul Terry
<e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
>Yes thanks, done this up to last line:
>'Show person entries for which there are no filed messages'
>
>How do I filter for that? I know only filtering on part of the address
>to find that.
--
Paul Terry
J. P. Gilliver (John)
Jan 28, 2012, 2:50:27 PM1/28/12
to
In article <Gub9dJUk36IPFwEk@[127.0.0.1]>, on Sat, 28 Jan 2012, Wm...
<tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote
[]
they had a U (universal?). As part of the upgrade to 6.07, which was the
final flail, they made any existing paid-for licence into an M
(multiseat?).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
It was kind of Wagnerian in that it was totally for blokes, but it didn't have
difficult woodwind passages. Stuart Maconie (on "Tommy") in Radio Times, 14-20
November 2009.
<tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote
[]
>All: was the show person entries for which there are no filed messages
>not in 6.05?
>
>All: Why does Eileen have an S not M license? Was that part of 6.07 too?
>
Before 6.07, there were single-seat licences and - I forget what, but
>not in 6.05?
>
>All: Why does Eileen have an S not M license? Was that part of 6.07 too?
>
they had a U (universal?). As part of the upgrade to 6.07, which was the
final flail, they made any existing paid-for licence into an M
(multiseat?).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
It was kind of Wagnerian in that it was totally for blokes, but it didn't have
difficult woodwind passages. Stuart Maconie (on "Tommy") in Radio Times, 14-20
November 2009.
Roy Brown
Jan 28, 2012, 9:58:03 AM1/28/12
to
In message <Gub9dJUk36IPFwEk@[127.0.0.1]>, Wm...
<tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writing at 08:12:20 in his/her
local time opines:-
>I know you are wary of change but the upgrade from 6.05 to 6.07 really
>should be painless and you now have a reason to do it.
Seconded.
>You are well liked in this ng and people clearly want to help you but
>it is tricky if you aren't using the same version as most of the people
>trying to help you. Apols if that seems a bit firm.
6.07 was mainly to support Vista, but it has fixes for other things too.
Best to upgrade, get on the same hymn sheet as the rest of us (except
for the TP5 diehards of course).
>All: was the show person entries for which there are no filed messages
>not in 6.05?
No.
i.e. it was/is there. Confusing way to ask the question, Wm :-(
>All: Why does Eileen have an S not M license?
At a guess, she never paid the £15 to upgrade her S to a U.
And why would you, unless you thought you might change your ISP from
Demon in the future?
Now, of course, it's £200. Unless some kind soul has a U/M licence they
no longer need, which they could let Eileen have?
> Was that part of 6.07 too?
6.07 gave everyone with a U licence a free upgrade to M.
It also gave everyone with an S licence the same free upgrade to
multiple-simultaneous-user functionality (i.e. the difference between U
and M), but left them tied to Demon as ISP, like the original S licence.
<tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writing at 08:12:20 in his/her
local time opines:-
>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 02:52:53 <a4iHXHTF...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
>demon.ip.support.turnpike Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
>>In message <IYwegrGJRYIPFwnG@[127.0.0.1]>, Wm...
>><tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writes
>>>Eileen: I presume you have tried
>>>
>>>Address book
>>>View
>>>Filter
>>>Show person entries for which there are no filed messages
>>
>>Yes thanks, done this up to last line:
>>'Show person entries for which there are no filed messages'
>>
>>How do I filter for that? I know only filtering on part of the address
>>to find that.
>I can't remember when it was introduced, it is definitely there in
>TP6.07M but possibly not TP6.05S which you are using.
It came with TP6. Any version.
>demon.ip.support.turnpike Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
>>In message <IYwegrGJRYIPFwnG@[127.0.0.1]>, Wm...
>><tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writes
>>>Eileen: I presume you have tried
>>>
>>>Address book
>>>View
>>>Filter
>>>Show person entries for which there are no filed messages
>>
>>Yes thanks, done this up to last line:
>>'Show person entries for which there are no filed messages'
>>
>>How do I filter for that? I know only filtering on part of the address
>>to find that.
>I can't remember when it was introduced, it is definitely there in
>TP6.07M but possibly not TP6.05S which you are using.
>I know you are wary of change but the upgrade from 6.05 to 6.07 really
>should be painless and you now have a reason to do it.
>You are well liked in this ng and people clearly want to help you but
>it is tricky if you aren't using the same version as most of the people
>trying to help you. Apols if that seems a bit firm.
Best to upgrade, get on the same hymn sheet as the rest of us (except
for the TP5 diehards of course).
>All: was the show person entries for which there are no filed messages
>not in 6.05?
i.e. it was/is there. Confusing way to ask the question, Wm :-(
>All: Why does Eileen have an S not M license?
And why would you, unless you thought you might change your ISP from
Demon in the future?
Now, of course, it's £200. Unless some kind soul has a U/M licence they
no longer need, which they could let Eileen have?
> Was that part of 6.07 too?
It also gave everyone with an S licence the same free upgrade to
multiple-simultaneous-user functionality (i.e. the difference between U
and M), but left them tied to Demon as ISP, like the original S licence.
Eileen Conn
Jan 29, 2012, 11:58:15 PM1/29/12
to
In message <Gub9dJUk36IPFwEk@[127.0.0.1]>, Wm...
<tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writes
this thread and the other one on other things first with the engineer
who comes tomorrow.
>You are well liked in this ng and people clearly want to help you but
>it is tricky if you aren't using the same version as most of the people
>trying to help you. Apols if that seems a bit firm.
>
Well that is nice and surprising to hear! I am always so nervous of
treading on the expert's toes in this group. They can't have any idea
what it is like not to be able to understand or speak their language
except in the most primitive way.
>All: was the show person entries for which there are no filed messages
>not in 6.05?
>
This mystery now solved. Sorry if this is unbelievable to some of you
but I didn't know I was supposed to look in View. I have used the filter
mechanism only through the filter at the side of the Find window in the
Address Book. Anyway I have now done this and it doesn't show anything
for the ghost address.
--
Eileen Conn
<tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writes
>>Yes thanks, done this up to last line:
>>'Show person entries for which there are no filed messages'
>>
>>How do I filter for that? I know only filtering on part of the address
>>to find that.
>
>I can't remember when it was introduced, it is definitely there in
>TP6.07M but possibly not TP6.05S which you are using.
>
>I know you are wary of change but the upgrade from 6.05 to 6.07 really
>should be painless and you now have a reason to do it.
>
I am waitign to go through soem other things that have been suggested in
>>'Show person entries for which there are no filed messages'
>>
>>How do I filter for that? I know only filtering on part of the address
>>to find that.
>
>I can't remember when it was introduced, it is definitely there in
>TP6.07M but possibly not TP6.05S which you are using.
>
>I know you are wary of change but the upgrade from 6.05 to 6.07 really
>should be painless and you now have a reason to do it.
>
this thread and the other one on other things first with the engineer
who comes tomorrow.
>You are well liked in this ng and people clearly want to help you but
>it is tricky if you aren't using the same version as most of the people
>trying to help you. Apols if that seems a bit firm.
>
treading on the expert's toes in this group. They can't have any idea
what it is like not to be able to understand or speak their language
except in the most primitive way.
>All: was the show person entries for which there are no filed messages
>not in 6.05?
>
but I didn't know I was supposed to look in View. I have used the filter
mechanism only through the filter at the side of the Find window in the
Address Book. Anyway I have now done this and it doesn't show anything
for the ghost address.
--
Eileen Conn
Eileen Conn
Jan 30, 2012, 12:02:11 AM1/30/12
to
In message <TPIjH0AF...@nospam.demon.co.uk>, Paul Terry
<ne...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
Thank you Paul. It was your mention of an OK button which alerted me to
the likelihood I was looking in the wrong place as I had never seen an
OK button with the filter mechanism. It turned out it was in View at the
top. I ad been just clicking on the filter icon alongside the find
window in the address book.
--
Eileen Conn
<ne...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
the likelihood I was looking in the wrong place as I had never seen an
OK button with the filter mechanism. It turned out it was in View at the
top. I ad been just clicking on the filter icon alongside the find
window in the address book.
--
Eileen Conn
Roy Brown
Jan 29, 2012, 7:04:31 AM1/29/12
to
In message <p82ayyjD...@soft255.demon.co.uk>, "J. P. Gilliver
(John)" <ju...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writing at 19:50:27 in his/her local
time opines:-
U - Universal. Any ISP Paid Upgrade.
Both allowing multiple seats, but only one TP User (plus Connect, which
is a sort-of-user) logged in at a time.
M - U with Multiple-simultaneous-user capability. Paid for seat by seat.
> As part of the upgrade to 6.07, which was the final flail, they made
>any existing paid-for licence into an M (multiseat?).
Should read:-
As part of the upgrade to 6.07, which was the final flail, they made any
existing licence into a multiple-simultaneous-user one for up to 255
seats.
S stayed S, but gained MSU capability for 255 seats.
U became M, with MSU capability for 255 seats.
Existing M grew from however many MSU seats you had paid for, to 255
(John)" <ju...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writing at 19:50:27 in his/her local
time opines:-
>In article <Gub9dJUk36IPFwEk@[127.0.0.1]>, on Sat, 28 Jan 2012, Wm...
><tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote
>[]
>>All: was the show person entries for which there are no filed messages
>>not in 6.05?
>>
>>All: Why does Eileen have an S not M license? Was that part of 6.07 too?
>>
>Before 6.07, there were single-seat licences and - I forget what, but
>they had a U (universal?).
S - Single. Now 'Shackled' (to Demon). Either way, Demon Only.
><tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> wrote
>[]
>>All: was the show person entries for which there are no filed messages
>>not in 6.05?
>>
>>All: Why does Eileen have an S not M license? Was that part of 6.07 too?
>>
>Before 6.07, there were single-seat licences and - I forget what, but
>they had a U (universal?).
U - Universal. Any ISP Paid Upgrade.
Both allowing multiple seats, but only one TP User (plus Connect, which
is a sort-of-user) logged in at a time.
M - U with Multiple-simultaneous-user capability. Paid for seat by seat.
> As part of the upgrade to 6.07, which was the final flail, they made
>any existing paid-for licence into an M (multiseat?).
As part of the upgrade to 6.07, which was the final flail, they made any
seats.
S stayed S, but gained MSU capability for 255 seats.
U became M, with MSU capability for 255 seats.
Existing M grew from however many MSU seats you had paid for, to 255
J. P. Gilliver (John)
Jan 30, 2012, 5:10:52 PM1/30/12
to
In article <wfZXEOBPXTJPFwZL@x.x>, on Sun, 29 Jan 2012, Roy Brown
<Roy_now_fre...@acanthus.demon.co.uk> wrote
Thanks for that! I had the feeling I'd got it wrong.
many kinds of motivation, among other functions. The hypothalamus controls the
"Four F's": fighting, fleeing, feeding, and mating. -Heard in a neuropsychology
classroom
<Roy_now_fre...@acanthus.demon.co.uk> wrote
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
The hypothalamus is one of the most important parts of the brain, involved in
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
many kinds of motivation, among other functions. The hypothalamus controls the
"Four F's": fighting, fleeing, feeding, and mating. -Heard in a neuropsychology
classroom
Eileen Conn
Jan 30, 2012, 5:59:49 PM1/30/12
to
In message <Gub9dJUk36IPFwEk@[127.0.0.1]>, Wm...
<tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writes
>
everything that is being said, and also making enquiries off DIST on who
could come and help do the upgrade. My computer engineer came today and
did the MS Chkdsk people suggested, and nothing showed up. He is now
having a look at the info on Spinrite to see if he can do that as well.
He has decided he does not want to do the upgrade as he does not know
enough about Turnpike to deal with any unexpected things if he does it.
So I need to find someone willing to make a site visit to do the upgrade
for me. I am making enquiries of a couple of people who have been here
once before and are experienced with Turnpike. But in case they can't
come or I don't hear, is there anyone else reading this in the London
area who would be willing to visit SE15 to do the upgrade at an
appropriate fee? Do please let me know.
>All: was the show person entries for which there are no filed messages
>not in 6.05?
>
Yes this is in 6.05. I just had never used VIEW to do the filter so had
not seen this option. The OK mentioned alerted me to the likelihood that
I was looking in the wrong place which I was.
>All: Why does Eileen have an S not M license? Was that part of 6.07 too?
>
I never even knew I had license until I started following DIST when the
helpline went to India. I would l have bought the U license long ago had
I known. I am not sure I need an M license. Is that for multiple users?
I am just me using my system. Might I need it?
I got my Turnpike in 1996 when I was a pioneer in using email in my
social and work circles, and had no idea about anything except that it
worked, and that Demon had a 24 hour help line supported by people who
knew how to answer every question, and sort out any problem. So I didn't
know the difference between Turnpike and Demon. It has been a nightmare
for me since the help line went off to India, and I discovered that
Turnpike actually was something totally different from Demon, and the
support slowly deteriorated till it ws non existent.
--
Eileen Conn
<tcn...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writes
>
>I can't remember when it was introduced, it is definitely there in
>TP6.07M but possibly not TP6.05S which you are using.
>I know you are wary of change but the upgrade from 6.05 to 6.07 really
>should be painless and you now have a reason to do it.
>You are well liked in this ng and people clearly want to help you but
>it is tricky if you aren't using the same version as most of the people
>trying to help you. Apols if that seems a bit firm.
>
I am not resisting - just listening and noting and thinking about
>TP6.07M but possibly not TP6.05S which you are using.
>I know you are wary of change but the upgrade from 6.05 to 6.07 really
>should be painless and you now have a reason to do it.
>You are well liked in this ng and people clearly want to help you but
>it is tricky if you aren't using the same version as most of the people
>trying to help you. Apols if that seems a bit firm.
>
everything that is being said, and also making enquiries off DIST on who
could come and help do the upgrade. My computer engineer came today and
did the MS Chkdsk people suggested, and nothing showed up. He is now
having a look at the info on Spinrite to see if he can do that as well.
He has decided he does not want to do the upgrade as he does not know
enough about Turnpike to deal with any unexpected things if he does it.
So I need to find someone willing to make a site visit to do the upgrade
for me. I am making enquiries of a couple of people who have been here
once before and are experienced with Turnpike. But in case they can't
come or I don't hear, is there anyone else reading this in the London
area who would be willing to visit SE15 to do the upgrade at an
appropriate fee? Do please let me know.
>All: was the show person entries for which there are no filed messages
>not in 6.05?
>
not seen this option. The OK mentioned alerted me to the likelihood that
I was looking in the wrong place which I was.
>All: Why does Eileen have an S not M license? Was that part of 6.07 too?
>
helpline went to India. I would l have bought the U license long ago had
I known. I am not sure I need an M license. Is that for multiple users?
I am just me using my system. Might I need it?
I got my Turnpike in 1996 when I was a pioneer in using email in my
social and work circles, and had no idea about anything except that it
worked, and that Demon had a 24 hour help line supported by people who
knew how to answer every question, and sort out any problem. So I didn't
know the difference between Turnpike and Demon. It has been a nightmare
for me since the help line went off to India, and I discovered that
Turnpike actually was something totally different from Demon, and the
support slowly deteriorated till it ws non existent.
--
Eileen Conn
Jim Crowther
Jan 30, 2012, 7:29:14 PM1/30/12
to
In demon.ip.support.turnpike, on Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:59:49, Eileen Conn
wrote:
>So I need to find someone willing to make a site visit to do the
>upgrade for me. I am making enquiries of a couple of people who have
>been here once before and are experienced with Turnpike. But in case
>they can't come or I don't hear, is there anyone else reading this in
>the London area who would be willing to visit SE15 to do the upgrade at
>an appropriate fee? Do please let me know.
I hope someone can step up and help you Eileen - I'm out of the equation
this time I'm afraid.
>I got my Turnpike in 1996
Then you should have a Universal license, as you'd have paid for
Turnpike back then. Have you the original documents?
--
Jim Crowther
wrote:
>So I need to find someone willing to make a site visit to do the
>upgrade for me. I am making enquiries of a couple of people who have
>been here once before and are experienced with Turnpike. But in case
>they can't come or I don't hear, is there anyone else reading this in
>the London area who would be willing to visit SE15 to do the upgrade at
>an appropriate fee? Do please let me know.
this time I'm afraid.
>I got my Turnpike in 1996
Turnpike back then. Have you the original documents?
--
Jim Crowther
Ian
Jan 30, 2012, 8:22:26 PM1/30/12
to
In message <U0KP3e+a...@nospam.at.my.choice.of.UID.invalid>, Jim
Crowther <Don't_bo...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writes
I've been using TP since '95/96, and I don't have a U licence, as I had
a choice of paying or not.
--
Ian
Crowther <Don't_bo...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writes
a choice of paying or not.
--
Ian
Eileen Conn
Jan 30, 2012, 11:01:18 PM1/30/12
to
In message <Dmm8opAS...@nospam.demon.co.uk>, Ian
<ne...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
didn't understand anything about it at that stage. I have none now. I
don't even recall how I bought it or who from! I don't recall disposing
of anything as I usually hoard guarantees and such things. But nothing
to be found on that early Turnpike. But then my life took some strange
twists and turns in the 4 years after 1996 so maybe not surprising I
can't recall such things.
--
Eileen Conn
<ne...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>In message <U0KP3e+a...@nospam.at.my.choice.of.UID.invalid>, Jim
>Crowther <Don't_bo...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writes
>>In demon.ip.support.turnpike, on Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:59:49, Eileen
>>Conn wrote:
>>
>>>So I need to find someone willing to make a site visit to do the
>>>upgrade for me. I am making enquiries of a couple of people who have
>Crowther <Don't_bo...@blackhole.do-not-spam.me.uk> writes
>>In demon.ip.support.turnpike, on Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:59:49, Eileen
>>Conn wrote:
>>
>>>So I need to find someone willing to make a site visit to do the
>>>upgrade for me. I am making enquiries of a couple of people who have
>>>here once before and are experienced with Turnpike. But in case they
>>>can't come or I don't hear, is there anyone else reading this in the
>>>London area who would be willing to visit SE15 to do the upgrade at
>>>an appropriate fee? Do please let me know.
>>
>>I hope someone can step up and help you Eileen - I'm out of the
>>equation this time I'm afraid.
>>
>>>I got my Turnpike in 1996
>>
>>Then you should have a Universal license, as you'd have paid for
>>Turnpike back then. Have you the original documents?
>>
>I've been using TP since '95/96, and I don't have a U licence, as I had
>a choice of paying or not.
Unfortunately I have no idea if I ever had any original documents as I
>>>can't come or I don't hear, is there anyone else reading this in the
>>>London area who would be willing to visit SE15 to do the upgrade at
>>>an appropriate fee? Do please let me know.
>>
>>I hope someone can step up and help you Eileen - I'm out of the
>>equation this time I'm afraid.
>>
>>>I got my Turnpike in 1996
>>
>>Then you should have a Universal license, as you'd have paid for
>>Turnpike back then. Have you the original documents?
>>
>I've been using TP since '95/96, and I don't have a U licence, as I had
>a choice of paying or not.
didn't understand anything about it at that stage. I have none now. I
don't even recall how I bought it or who from! I don't recall disposing
of anything as I usually hoard guarantees and such things. But nothing
to be found on that early Turnpike. But then my life took some strange
twists and turns in the 4 years after 1996 so maybe not surprising I
can't recall such things.
--
Eileen Conn
vg4cysss7001
Jan 31, 2012, 1:30:15 AM1/31/12
to
In article <LPDl32AT...@nospam.demon.co.uk>, Paul Terry
<ne...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>In message <rWzrMra5...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
><e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>settings in a way that creates a loop back.
>
>You could think of it as someone who has moved and who has asked Royal
>Mail to redirect his mail from A to B. Unfortunately, he has also left
>an instruction that anything sent to B should be redirected to A: so
>his emails just go round and round in a loop between A and B without
>every being delivered.
It turns out that abelgratis is an Edinburgh-based ISP:
<http://www.abelgratis.com/>.
From their LH menu, "Free Domains" link results in an error:
"Object not found!
The requested URL was not found on this server. The link on the
referring page seems to be wrong or outdated. Please inform the author
of that page about the error.
If you think this is a server error, please contact the webmaster
Error 404
www.abelgratis.com
Tue Jan 31 06:24:42 2012
Apache".
That adds weight to Paul's theory above.
Also:
"Gratis users benefit from unlimited multi-user email addresses,
multiple mail boxes, unlimited email aliases and the choice of SMTP mail
delivery."
Perhaps they had a Peckham node that is no longer operative, or
someone was given a sub-domain (c. f. Demon) of 'Peckham'.
It would not surprise me if they could shed some light on the
original error message. Equally, I would expect an ISP to be more
competent at inserting 'hooks' into an end-user's system than yer
average Joe Public.
<ne...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>In message <rWzrMra5...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, Eileen Conn
><e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>>Has anyone else experienced this and know what to do about it?
>
>Basically, your correspondent (or his ISP) has messed up his email
>
>settings in a way that creates a loop back.
>
>You could think of it as someone who has moved and who has asked Royal
>Mail to redirect his mail from A to B. Unfortunately, he has also left
>an instruction that anything sent to B should be redirected to A: so
>his emails just go round and round in a loop between A and B without
>every being delivered.
It turns out that abelgratis is an Edinburgh-based ISP:
<http://www.abelgratis.com/>.
From their LH menu, "Free Domains" link results in an error:
"Object not found!
The requested URL was not found on this server. The link on the
referring page seems to be wrong or outdated. Please inform the author
of that page about the error.
If you think this is a server error, please contact the webmaster
Error 404
www.abelgratis.com
Tue Jan 31 06:24:42 2012
Apache".
That adds weight to Paul's theory above.
Also:
"Gratis users benefit from unlimited multi-user email addresses,
multiple mail boxes, unlimited email aliases and the choice of SMTP mail
delivery."
Perhaps they had a Peckham node that is no longer operative, or
someone was given a sub-domain (c. f. Demon) of 'Peckham'.
It would not surprise me if they could shed some light on the
original error message. Equally, I would expect an ISP to be more
competent at inserting 'hooks' into an end-user's system than yer
average Joe Public.
J. P. Gilliver (John)
Jan 31, 2012, 3:35:08 AM1/31/12
to
In article <BHRxojvO...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, on Tue, 31 Jan 2012,
Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
[]
receiving some discs in a box (possibly dark blue or orange) with some
manuals - then you're entitled to a licence now. Unless you bought it
from someone (possibly a stall) who was just (probably illegally)
selling copies of the free version.
"Well, I certainly hope you die soon." - Broadcast News
Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
[]
>Unfortunately I have no idea if I ever had any original documents as I
>didn't understand anything about it at that stage. I have none now. I
>don't even recall how I bought it or who from! I don't recall disposing
>of anything as I usually hoard guarantees and such things. But nothing
>to be found on that early Turnpike. But then my life took some strange
>twists and turns in the 4 years after 1996 so maybe not surprising I
>can't recall such things.
If you actually bought it - which in those days would have meant you
>didn't understand anything about it at that stage. I have none now. I
>don't even recall how I bought it or who from! I don't recall disposing
>of anything as I usually hoard guarantees and such things. But nothing
>to be found on that early Turnpike. But then my life took some strange
>twists and turns in the 4 years after 1996 so maybe not surprising I
>can't recall such things.
receiving some discs in a box (possibly dark blue or orange) with some
manuals - then you're entitled to a licence now. Unless you bought it
from someone (possibly a stall) who was just (probably illegally)
selling copies of the free version.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
"Now, is there anything I can do for you?"
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
"Well, I certainly hope you die soon." - Broadcast News
Ian
Jan 31, 2012, 6:27:08 AM1/31/12
to
In message <c9pHCFZ8...@soft255.demon.co.uk>, "J. P. Gilliver
(John)" <ju...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
I could have upgraded the licence for £15, but only now see what a good
idea it would have been.
--
Ian
(John)" <ju...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <BHRxojvO...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, on Tue, 31 Jan
>2012, Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
>[]
>>Unfortunately I have no idea if I ever had any original documents as I
>>didn't understand anything about it at that stage. I have none now. I
>>don't even recall how I bought it or who from! I don't recall
>>disposing of anything as I usually hoard guarantees and such things.
>>But nothing to be found on that early Turnpike. But then my life took
>>some strange twists and turns in the 4 years after 1996 so maybe not
>>surprising I can't recall such things.
>
>If you actually bought it - which in those days would have meant you
>receiving some discs in a box (possibly dark blue or orange) with some
>manuals - then you're entitled to a licence now. Unless you bought it
>from someone (possibly a stall) who was just (probably illegally)
>selling copies of the free version.
I got my copy of TP from a magazine cover disk.
>2012, Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
>[]
>>Unfortunately I have no idea if I ever had any original documents as I
>>didn't understand anything about it at that stage. I have none now. I
>>don't even recall how I bought it or who from! I don't recall
>>disposing of anything as I usually hoard guarantees and such things.
>>But nothing to be found on that early Turnpike. But then my life took
>>some strange twists and turns in the 4 years after 1996 so maybe not
>>surprising I can't recall such things.
>
>If you actually bought it - which in those days would have meant you
>receiving some discs in a box (possibly dark blue or orange) with some
>manuals - then you're entitled to a licence now. Unless you bought it
>from someone (possibly a stall) who was just (probably illegally)
>selling copies of the free version.
I could have upgraded the licence for £15, but only now see what a good
idea it would have been.
--
Ian
Wm...
Jan 31, 2012, 2:07:28 PM1/31/12
to
Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:59:49 <6+rvG5Zl...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
demon.ip.support.turnpike Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
>So I need to find someone willing to make a site visit to do the
>upgrade for me. I am making enquiries of a couple of people who have
>been here once before and are experienced with Turnpike. But in case
>they can't come or I don't hear, is there anyone else reading this in
>the London area who would be willing to visit SE15 to do the upgrade at
>an appropriate fee? Do please let me know.
I'm SE16 / Bermondsey if you get stuck.
demon.ip.support.turnpike Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
>So I need to find someone willing to make a site visit to do the
>upgrade for me. I am making enquiries of a couple of people who have
>been here once before and are experienced with Turnpike. But in case
>they can't come or I don't hear, is there anyone else reading this in
>the London area who would be willing to visit SE15 to do the upgrade at
>an appropriate fee? Do please let me know.
Eileen Conn
Feb 1, 2012, 4:54:01 AM2/1/12
to
In message <c9pHCFZ8...@soft255.demon.co.uk>, "J. P. Gilliver
(John)" <ju...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
(John)" <ju...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <BHRxojvO...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>, on Tue, 31 Jan
>2012, Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
>[]
>>Unfortunately I have no idea if I ever had any original documents as I
>>didn't understand anything about it at that stage. I have none now. I
>>don't even recall how I bought it or who from! I don't recall
>>disposing of anything as I usually hoard guarantees and such things.
>>But nothing to be found on that early Turnpike. But then my life took
>>some strange twists and turns in the 4 years after 1996 so maybe not
>>surprising I can't recall such things.
>
>If you actually bought it - which in those days would have meant you
>receiving some discs in a box (possibly dark blue or orange) with some
>manuals - then you're entitled to a licence now. Unless you bought it
>from someone (possibly a stall) who was just (probably illegally)
>selling copies of the free version.
Ah as I never buy such things from anything other than an official
>2012, Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk> wrote
>[]
>>Unfortunately I have no idea if I ever had any original documents as I
>>didn't understand anything about it at that stage. I have none now. I
>>don't even recall how I bought it or who from! I don't recall
>>disposing of anything as I usually hoard guarantees and such things.
>>But nothing to be found on that early Turnpike. But then my life took
>>some strange twists and turns in the 4 years after 1996 so maybe not
>>surprising I can't recall such things.
>
>If you actually bought it - which in those days would have meant you
>receiving some discs in a box (possibly dark blue or orange) with some
>manuals - then you're entitled to a licence now. Unless you bought it
>from someone (possibly a stall) who was just (probably illegally)
>selling copies of the free version.
source, this has triggered a memory - not the exact details but it was
probably a computer supplier of some sort who was installing it on my
machine. Maybe I never got the disc or paperwork.
--
Eileen Conn
Wm...
Feb 1, 2012, 9:26:06 AM2/1/12
to
Wed, 1 Feb 2012 09:54:01 <uXv6Mc25...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
demon.ip.support.turnpike Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
>Ah as I never buy such things from anything other than an official
>source, this has triggered a memory - not the exact details but it was
>probably a computer supplier of some sort who was installing it on my
>machine. Maybe I never got the disc or paperwork.
Hmmn, if you paid for it, it should be yours
demon.ip.support.turnpike Eileen Conn <e.c...@nutbrook.demon.co.uk>
>Ah as I never buy such things from anything other than an official
>source, this has triggered a memory - not the exact details but it was
>probably a computer supplier of some sort who was installing it on my
>machine. Maybe I never got the disc or paperwork.
0 new messages