I found a *better* workaround for the "can't delete Usenet headers" bug!
Robbie Hatley
Backstory: For those of you who don't realize it, TB3 has the
following 4 bugs regarding filtering and deletion of downloaded
Usenet headers:
1. You can't delete headers.
2. If you *try* to delete a header (select it and hit your
"Delete" key), TB3 tries to issue a "cancel" request to
your Usenet server instead, which (of course) will always
fail, because you were not the author. (And it usually
fails even if you *are* the author, because very few
Usenet servers actually obey "cancel" requests.)
3. You can't easily select Usenet servers in the "Filters"
window. (It can be done, but its tricky.)
4. If you get past bug 3, select a server, and make filters
to axe spam, you can't *apply* those filters. (They will
effect future headers, but not the ones you've downloaded
so far.)
I posted a workaround for these 4 bugs a few days back.
But my workaround was a bit cumbersome, involving going into
the Thunderbird Application Data files and finding and deleting
*.msf files.
However, I just discovered an easier way! Here's my latest
workaround for all 4 of the above bugs at once:
1. Click Tools/Message Filters
2. In the "Filters For" box, select the "Local Folders" item.
3. Repeatedly tap your down-arrow key until the name of the
desired Usenet server is displayed. (This is the only way.
This can *not* be done with the mouse, due to yet another bug.)
4. Create filters to delete the things you want to delete. You
can enter specific addresses, keywords, domains, subject phrases,
etc. Make sure the "Enabled" checkbox is checked for each filter.
5. Close the "Message Filters" window.
6. Right-click the newsgroup you want to delete headers from and
select "Properties". Click the "Rebuild Index" button, then
click "OK".
7. Right-click the newsgroup and select "Get Messages".
Voila! All filtered headers will now be gone.
--
Cheers,
Robbie Hatley
Stanton, CA, USA
lonewolf at well dot com
www dot well dot com slant tilde lonewolf slant
WLS
I found an even better way, Use a real newsreader app.
EE
load only unread messages, as in
"mail.server.serverX.downloadUnreadOnly". That applies to newsgroups as
well as email. If there are messages I do not want to see again, I mark
them as read, and they will not be shown again.
goodwin
<snip useless filter info>
>>
> I have an easier way to do that. I set the server in about:config to
> load only unread messages, as in
> "mail.server.serverX.downloadUnreadOnly". That applies to newsgroups as
> well as email. If there are messages I do not want to see again, I mark
> them as read, and they will not be shown again.
Firstly, I can't find that pref documented anywhere, but thats no
surprise since preference documentation is badly fractured and dislocated.
(Go to http://kb.mozillazine.org/Category:Preferences - scroll to the
bottom where it says Next 200 - where does that link go for you?)
Secondly, what you are saying doesn't make sense to me - how would you
download read messages?
This topic is going from the ridiculous to the sublime.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
The about:config entry is correct if you sub X for a number such as
server1 for instance, example in mine:
mail.server.server1.downloadUnreadOnly
If you search for just mail.server.server you will find the entry.
However, this does not alleviate the fact that some users don't
understand the difference between delete, cancel, read and unread and
their related functions regarding news messages and headers that reside
on the server and those that are downloaded for OFFline as well as
ONline reading. I gave up a while back on this issue.
--
*Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion*
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Firefox - SeaMonkey - Flock - Thunderbird
goodwin
> On 22.05.2010 21:52, goodwin wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> On 05/22/2010 11:32 AM EE scribbled:
>>
>> <snip useless filter info>
>>
>>> I have an easier way to do that. I set the server in about:config to
>>> load only unread messages, as in
>>> "mail.server.serverX.downloadUnreadOnly". That applies to newsgroups as
>>> well as email. If there are messages I do not want to see again, I mark
>>> them as read, and they will not be shown again.
>> Firstly, I can't find that pref documented anywhere, but thats no
>> surprise since preference documentation is badly fractured and dislocated.
>>
>> (Go to http://kb.mozillazine.org/Category:Preferences - scroll to the
>> bottom where it says Next 200 - where does that link go for you?)
>>
>> Secondly, what you are saying doesn't make sense to me - how would you
>> download read messages?
>>
>> This topic is going from the ridiculous to the sublime.
>
> The about:config entry is correct if you sub X for a number such as
> server1 for instance, example in mine:
>
> mail.server.server1.downloadUnreadOnly
I don't have that entry nor could I find it via the kb - stopped there.
Could this entry be related to IMAP - sounds like it?
EE
> On 05/22/2010 11:32 AM EE scribbled:
If you want mail and news settings, this page is better, but it does not
list that one. http://kb.mozillazine.org/Mail_and_news_settings
I found that setting in my about:config settings, and it made sense to
me to set it as true, and it has worked fine for me for several years.
With newsgroup messages, they are for everybody, not just one person or
business entity, so they cannot be deleted off the server by anyone (in
a few cases, the author can delete his own message). Whether you read
the messages or not, they are still on the server. Somehow Thunderbird
keeps track of what messages you have read.
If I have no interest in a particular message and do not want it to
appear again, I mark it as being read (hit the "r" key). If I have read
a message, but do want it to appear next time, I change the status to
"not read" and the header will be loaded again next time.
Timo Pietilä
> However, this does not alleviate the fact that some users don't
> understand the difference between delete, cancel, read and unread and
> their related functions regarding news messages and headers that reside
> on the server and those that are downloaded for OFFline as well as
> ONline reading. I gave up a while back on this issue.
Everyone here understood what is the difference between those things you
mentioned. Confusion was entirely yours. This isn't about offline or
online reading. It is about newsgroup message list. Delete should do the
same as "ignore thread" does, but for single message instead of entire
thread. TB just simply doesn't have that feature.
Your major problem was that you didn't understand the problem in hand.
You kept answering the question nobody made.
Timo Pietil�
Timo Pietilä
> 3. You can't easily select Usenet servers in the "Filters"
> window. (It can be done, but its tricky.)
This is a bit confusing to me. I can get to any server I want just fine
with mouse. I could do it with TB3, TB3.1 and currently in TB2. I think
there is something broken in your TB if you can't get to filters with mouse.
For single group easiest is obviously just to select it from the folder
panel and then go to tools-filters because then it is already selected.
You can also make filters with right-click to message header section
"From:xxxx" and select "Create filter from message", but then you cannot
select the server, it makes it to that particular group.
Timo Pietil�
goodwin
<snip>
> Whether you read the messages or not, they are still on the server.
I'm well aware of that and if I wasn't, I certainly would be by
following only 1/2 this thread.
> Somehow Thunderbird keeps track of what messages you have read.
I believe thats with the .rc and .msf files
> If I have no interest in a particular message and do not want it to
> appear again, I mark it as being read (hit the "r" key).
So you view only read msgs. and don't see unread (after going away and
coming back.
> If I have read a message, but do want it to appear next time, I
> change the status to "not read" and the header will be loaded again
> next time.
I don't understand how that is done at all - how do you mark a message
you don't see?
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
Did you search for just "mail.server.server" ?? And no, it's not related
to just IMAP but all protocols.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> Timo Pietilä
I understood and continue to understand the original issue. It is my
solution(s) that are not understood simply because when somebody keeps
telling me that what I have been doing for years doesn't work it is then
time to move on.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> On 05/23/2010 12:02 PM EE scribbled:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Whether you read the messages or not, they are still on the server.
>
> I'm well aware of that and if I wasn't, I certainly would be by
> following only 1/2 this thread.
>
>> Somehow Thunderbird keeps track of what messages you have read.
>
> I believe thats with the .rc and .msf files
That is correct.
>> If I have no interest in a particular message and do not want it to
>> appear again, I mark it as being read (hit the "r" key).
>
> So you view only read msgs. and don't see unread (after going away and
> coming back.
Depends on whether you mark as read or not. And that fact is one of the
chief gripes regarding users that don't quote.
>> If I have read a message, but do want it to appear next time, I
>> change the status to "not read" and the header will be loaded again
>> next time.
>
> I don't understand how that is done at all - how do you mark a message
> you don't see?
After reading a message it changes to "read" status - grays out but is
still in view. To mark it as UNread for next visit then click on the
little dot in the "read" column next to the message(s).
goodwin
<snip>
>
> Did you search for just "mail.server.server" ?? And no, it's not related
> to just IMAP but all protocols.
>
>
I did and didn't /see/ it (oops) - I have only one for server7, which is
the mozilla server. None of my others show it.
Coincidence?
I'm having a hard time understanding this. Only one out of 3 news
servers has the setting - so some setting is different?
I think I owe EE an apology but still am confused - guess never thought
along these lines, which are parallel to what I /thought/ I knew.
John H Meyers
> However, this does not alleviate the fact that some users don't
> understand the difference between delete, cancel, read and unread and
> their related functions regarding news messages and headers that reside
> on the server and those that are downloaded for OFFline as well as
> ONline reading. I gave up a while back on this issue.
Thunderbird itself doesn't understand the difference
between "Delete" and "Cancel,"
since, in regard to news server accounts,
it substitutes "Cancel" for any attempt to "Delete,"
including via a tool button clearly labeled as "Delete"
(the one with the big red "X" whose tooltip says "Delete...")
and does not implement "Delete"
(this message and/or its listing, from my computer) at all.
Neither the most uninformed nor the most fully expert user
can do anything about this absurdity.
The naive user might even unintentionally
cancel his own posts (from the server) by attempting merely to delete them
from the list he wants to keep on his computer for further review --
this is an example of particularly horrific "human factors" design:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_factors
http://www.humanfactors.com/
(the world's largest company specializing in HF design,
which for 29 years has helped a vast number of major clients,
including Microsoft, to avoid such blunders)
http://www.humanfactors.com/clients/clientoverview.asp
--
John H Meyers
in many fields (sometimes amusing):
http://www.baddesigns.com/examples.html
Need a textbook?
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0131837362
--
goodwin
And I guess the switch for this must be under settings for offline.
I've never bothered with that I've never worked offline.
Maybe I should try it sometime.
Sorry for bumbling into this...
John H Meyers
> If there are messages I do not want to see again,
> I mark them as read, and they will not be shown again.
Thus also disabling your ability to _keep_ and _redisplay_ any "read" messages,
or forcing you to sacrifice the ability to distinguish "read" from "unread,"
by pretending that all you wish to keep remain "unread."
> If I have read a message, but do want it to appear next time,
> I change the status to "not read" and the header will be loaded again next time.
How do you change the status of a message that does not even appear in the list?
Or, if the message never actually disappears from the newsgroup list,
then the desired objective (its disappearance from even that list)
was never achieved in the first place.
This reminds me of the very opening of
"Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth" by R. Buckminster Fuller:
"I am enthusiastic over humanity's extraordinary
and sometimes very timely ingenuities.
If you are in a shipwreck and all the boats are gone,
a piano top buoyant enough to keep you afloat that comes along
makes a fortuitous life preserver.
But this is not to say that the best way to design a life preserver
is in the form of a piano top."
http://web.archive.org/web/20080323232947/http://bfi.org/?q=node/421
--
"Impromptu," by Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
"Jack, eating rotten cheese, did say,
Like Samson I my thousands slay.
I vow, quoth Roger, so you do,
And with the selfsame weapon too."
http://web.archive.org/web/20010924170545/http://www.bartleby.com/66/97/22997.html
The Real Bev
FWIW, the Thunderbird-only section is TRULY pitiful.
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Category:Preferences_%28Thunderbird%29
--
Cheers, Bev
------------------------------------------------------
"Don't bother looking for that key. There is no Esc."
-- M. Tabnik
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
The setting in the config is just for news servers, not mail and yes
confusing.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
The "delete" "cancel" thing is a holdover from way back when you could
actually cancel your messages off the Netscape Secnews server. Since
there is no such KEY on your KEYboard as CANCEL, the word DELETE meant
the same thing and DELETE is actually on the keyboard. That's the
reason, like it or not. Absurd to some, fact to others. I understand both.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
I have seen that before, most are quite old and dated.
followup set to .general
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> On 5/22/2010 1:32 PM:
>
>> If there are messages I do not want to see again,
>> I mark them as read, and they will not be shown again.
>
> Thus also disabling your ability to _keep_ and _redisplay_ any "read"
> messages,
> or forcing you to sacrifice the ability to distinguish "read" from
> "unread,"
> by pretending that all you wish to keep remain "unread."
>> If I have read a message, but do want it to appear next time,
>> I change the status to "not read" and the header will be loaded again
>> next time.
>
> How do you change the status of a message that does not even appear in
> the list?
> Or, if the message never actually disappears from the newsgroup list,
> then the desired objective (its disappearance from even that list)
> was never achieved in the first place.
Answering both questions with ONE answer ...
If you read a message it auto-grays but is still visible. If you want to
keep the message then you re-mark it as UNread by clicking the little
dot under the "read" column. If you don't have a "read" column then
click on the little widget to the far right in the column headers and
check the entry "read".
>
> This reminds me of the very opening of
> "Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth" by R. Buckminster Fuller:
>
>
> "I am enthusiastic over humanity's extraordinary
> and sometimes very timely ingenuities.
No, this reminds ME of Hendrik Willem van Loon's statement in the
"History of Mankind" .. "I love mankind, it's people I can't stand".
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> FWIW, the Thunderbird-only section is TRULY pitiful.
>
> http://kb.mozillazine.org/Category:Preferences_%28Thunderbird%29
>
Unfortunately this is very true as regards a lot of documentation
related to computer applications.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
That quote is attributed to Charles Schulz, creater of "Peanuts" but it
was actually said by van Loon when being interviewed in 1921 after
release of his book "The Story of Mankind".
f'up to .general
John H Meyers
> The "delete" "cancel" thing is a holdover from way back when you could
> actually cancel your messages off the Netscape Secnews server. Since
> there is no such KEY on your KEYboard as CANCEL, the word DELETE meant
> the same thing and DELETE is actually on the keyboard. That's the
> reason, like it or not. Absurd to some, fact to others. I understand both.
In Human Factors design terms, "Cancel" is a rather rare function,
usable only on one's own postings, while "Delete" (from my list on this computer)
is a very common and desirable function, also perfectly consistent in its aim
with the same function for mail. Therefore, "Delete" is what should be
the prominent function, also completely consistent with its use for mail,
and "Cancel" should be located in some menu where it can be found,
but is otherwise out of harm's way, and not "covering" the needed function,
which isn't available at all.
I therefore can't see the value of trying to justify doing otherwise
on the basis of a most contorted logic about one server, on which
you seem to imply(?) that you can't still even cancel anything.
There once was a time when, due to certain unions,
a railroad "fireman" (boiler stoker) had to still be employed
on every train, even when they had fully electric (or diesel) locomotives,
but I think it may be about time to discontinue any further boiler stoking in Thunderbird ;-)
--
John H Meyers
> Answering both questions with ONE answer ...
>
> If you read a message it auto-grays but is still visible.
Then it's not been "deleted," and nothing useful has been accomplished.
If all I want is to "mark" messages gray, then I can set one of the "tags"
to gray and hit that tag key to "gray" it, without having to sacrifice
my ability to still differentiate truly read vs. unread messages
that I still want to KEEP.
There was a song in the 1949 musical "South Pacific" titled
"There is Nothin' Like a Dame" -- lines slightly re-arranged here:
There is nothin' you can name
That is anythin' like a dame!
There are no books like a dame,
And nothin' looks like a dame.
There are no drinks like a dame,
And nothin' thinks like a dame,
Nothin' acts like a dame,
Or attracts like a dame.
We have nothin' to put on a clean white suit for
What we need is what there ain't no substitute for...
The only thing that looks and acts anything like "Delete"
is "Delete" itself, and no attempt at rationalizing this away,
or trying to pawn off an inverted mop with a petticoat as a substitute,
is ever going to satisfy the need for the real thing.
--
Timo Pietilä
> On 23.05.2010 15:17, Timo Pietil� wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>>
>>> However, this does not alleviate the fact that some users don't
>>> understand the difference between delete, cancel, read and unread and
>>> their related functions regarding news messages and headers that reside
>>> on the server and those that are downloaded for OFFline as well as
>>> ONline reading. I gave up a while back on this issue.
>> Everyone here understood what is the difference between those things you
>> mentioned. Confusion was entirely yours. This isn't about offline or
>> online reading. It is about newsgroup message list. Delete should do the
>> same as "ignore thread" does, but for single message instead of entire
>> thread. TB just simply doesn't have that feature.
>>
>> Your major problem was that you didn't understand the problem in hand.
>> You kept answering the question nobody made.
> I understood and continue to understand the original issue. It is my
> solution(s) that are not understood simply because when somebody keeps
> telling me that what I have been doing for years doesn't work it is then
> time to move on.
IIRC your "solution" was to copy message to "local folders". I still
don't see how this makes the message disappear from newsgroup message
list. If your solution works there is something missing in your explanation.
Timo Pietil�
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
You DELETE mail messages, you CANCEL your news postings on servers that
do allow cancels. You cannot DELETE news messages off the server. But
you CAN delete news messages that have been downoaded for OFFline
reading. So ... the two functions are functional and as far as I am
concerned can remain as such and I have no problem dealing with it.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> On 5/23/2010 11:32 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>
>> Answering both questions with ONE answer ...
>>
>> If you read a message it auto-grays but is still visible.
>
> Then it's not been "deleted," and nothing useful has been accomplished.
What has been accomplished is READING it and then MARKING it as UNread.
It's not been DELETED because you CANNOT delete a message off a news server.
> If all I want is to "mark" messages gray, then I can set one of the "tags"
> to gray and hit that tag key to "gray" it, without having to sacrifice
> my ability to still differentiate truly read vs. unread messages
> that I still want to KEEP.
You can take the extra time to do that IF you wish but I'd rather take
less time by reading a message and then either leave it as read OR
marking it as UNread so that it's still there when I revisit the thread.
> The only thing that looks and acts anything like "Delete"
> is "Delete" itself, and no attempt at rationalizing this away,
> or trying to pawn off an inverted mop with a petticoat as a substitute,
> is ever going to satisfy the need for the real thing.
Sir, please take the time to fully understand that you cannot delete a
message off the news server. You can only mark as read of which the
functionality is to remove the message from view the next time you visit
the thread(s). "Delete" is only a function regarding mail that has been
fully downloaded to your local system.
Jay Garcia
> IIRC your "solution" was to copy message to "local folders". I still
> don't see how this makes the message disappear from newsgroup message
> list. If your solution works there is something missing in your
> explanation.
>
> Timo Pietilä
Robie Hatley's concern that I specifically addressed was that he was
trying to find a way to remove specific message content from the MSF
file. Thunderbird does not have a method to that on a per message basis
as it is a case of all or none. My solution to THAT specific issue is to
download for offline reading all messages that you care to read and then
afterwards delete those you don't want. The result is that there are no
messages remaining in the MSF file(s). I have been doing that
successfully for years. Those newsgroup messages that you refer to in
the "list" are removed from view by marking them as read, that is - if
we're speaking of the same "list". The MSF file is then re-indexed which
then clears the MSF file completely. To further enhance the experience,
filters can be created and applied to messages as they are being
downloaded from the server. TB is a pretty fair newsreader IF one takes
the tour and learns how to use it to their advantage.
Timo Pietilä
> On 24.05.2010 01:23, Timo Pietil� wrote:
>
>> IIRC your "solution" was to copy message to "local folders". I still
>> don't see how this makes the message disappear from newsgroup message
>> list. If your solution works there is something missing in your
>> explanation.
>>
>
> Robie Hatley's concern that I specifically addressed was that he was
> trying to find a way to remove specific message content from the MSF
> file.
Which was only because he wanted to get rid of the message in newsgroup
message list. A suggestion he did throw in the air as a possible thing
he could do if it is needed for achieving that goal.
> Thunderbird does not have a method to that on a per message basis
> as it is a case of all or none. My solution to THAT specific issue is to
> download for offline reading all messages that you care to read and then
> afterwards delete those you don't want. The result is that there are no
> messages remaining in the MSF file(s).
As I said your answer is for a question nobody made. It is a correct
answer to that question, but it only increased his frustration, because
it had nothing to do with his problem.
> I have been doing that
> successfully for years. Those newsgroup messages that you refer to in
> the "list" are removed from view by marking them as read, that is - if
> we're speaking of the same "list".
Apparently we are not. Message list is the one that shows you the list
of messages in TB UI. The one above message panel right to folder panel.
Sometimes referred as "header panel", but because headers are actually
shown between message panel and message list, I prefer calling it a
message list. Robert Hatley refers to same thing. Where else could you
see the newsgroup spam in TB UI and where else would you want to get rid
of them?
Those messages go nowhere by marking them read. They only get greyed.
There is an option to show only unread, but I definitely do not want to
see only unread messages, because need for re-read some old ones every
now and then. Go back to refresh memory and sometimes to copy & paste
things as reference to other messages.
> The MSF file is then re-indexed which
> then clears the MSF file completely. To further enhance the experience,
> filters can be created and applied to messages as they are being
> downloaded from the server.
That is what he wrote now. Make a filter - reindex - reload messages,
problematic messages are gone.
> TB is a pretty fair newsreader IF one takes
> the tour and learns how to use it to their advantage.
Yes it is. There just isn't delete for individual messages, which is
something that IMO there should be. There is "ignore thread" which makes
entire threads disappear, so the mechanism is there, just the UI is
missing. I think delete should do that instead of trying to cancel
messages. Cancel could be something you find in menus. Maybe in "other
actions" -dropdown button in TB3 header section.
Timo Pietil�
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> Jay Garcia wrote:
>> On 24.05.2010 01:23, Timo Pietilä wrote:
>>
>>> IIRC your "solution" was to copy message to "local folders". I still
>>> don't see how this makes the message disappear from newsgroup message
>>> list. If your solution works there is something missing in your
>>> explanation.
>>>
>>> Timo Pietilä
> Timo Pietilä
Sorry you still don't get it. I'm not going to keep repeating myself any
longer ... Cheers and good luck.
Timo Pietilä
> On 24.05.2010 13:24, Timo Pietil� wrote:
<snip>
>> Yes it is. There just isn't delete for individual messages, which is
>> something that IMO there should be. There is "ignore thread" which makes
>> entire threads disappear, so the mechanism is there, just the UI is
>> missing. I think delete should do that instead of trying to cancel
>> messages. Cancel could be something you find in menus. Maybe in "other
>> actions" -dropdown button in TB3 header section.
> Sorry you still don't get it. I'm not going to keep repeating myself any
> longer ... Cheers and good luck.
I pretty much think I did get it, but you didn't. Some people just are
blind to their own mistakes and I guess you are one of them. I can't
explain where you did go wrong more clearly, so if you didn't get it
this time this debate is obviously pointless.
Timo Pietil�
EE
> On 05/23/2010 12:02 PM EE scribbled:
>> appear again, I mark it as being read (hit the "r" key).
>
> So you view only read msgs. and don't see unread (after going away and
> coming back.
>
>> If I have read a message, but do want it to appear next time, I
>> change the status to "not read" and the header will be loaded again
>> next time.
>
> I don't understand how that is done at all - how do you mark a message
> you don't see?
>
and coming back.
If I want to change the read/unread status of a message, I can
right-click it in the message list, choose Mark > As read. If that item
is checked already, it has been read. If I click that, the check
disappears and it is interpreted as unread. If the item is not checked
(it was not read), clicking it will check it, and it will be interpreted
as read.
EE
I do not remember ever having to go offline with Thunderbird. The setup
I suggested has nothing to do with going offline.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> Jay Garcia wrote:
> Timo Pietilä
This is the conversation I continually refer to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robie Hately says:
What we're asking is *THIS*:
"How can a Thunderbird user delete specific downloaded Usenet headers
(and the messages behind the headers, if they've been read and hence
downloaded) from our own home computers?"
I'm not taking "it can't be done" as an answer. If nothing else, I
could probably do it by going into the news headers-and-messages files
and manually editing the damn things in a text editor such as NoteTab
(or a binary editor such as HXD or NEO if they're not text).
But I'm hoping someone knows an easier way.
**** And then this:
> Timo, where are these messages? I don't work off line, maybe tats >
> it, but i don't have a lot of dead stuff lying about....
**** To which Robie Hatley replied:
Thunderbird keeps Usenet headers and message bodies in the same place
whether you work "online" or "offline". They are kept in "msf" files
in the following folder:
C:\Documents and Settings\your_user_id\Application Data\Thunderbird\
Profiles\a1b2c3d4.default\News\news.your-server-name.com\
One file exist for each Usenet newsgroup, named the same as the group,
with an "msf" extention. Eg, the file for "comp.os.linux.misc" is named
"comp.os.linux.misc.msf".
****** And then I said:
> Yes, of course .. any files that reside on your computer can be
> "deleted".
We all kno that, Jay. That was never the question.
> That's not the issue as far as I can tell.
Then why are you talking about it?
***** And then he went off the track and started talking nonsense about
the server rather than the MSF files that he started talking about:
> Messages that reside on the host server cannot be removed or
> otherwise deleted.
Nonsense. Of course messages on servers can be deleted. Eventually,
they are deleted when the message age or data size reaches the limits
of the server's retention. Also, some NNTP server operators delete
spam messages, or messages with binary attachments, or messages which
violate their TOS, etc. All these, however, are forms of censorship,
and most Usenet users avoid subscribing to servers who do this.
> They can only be "marked as read".
No, NNTP servers do not mark messages as "read". That would be
nonsensical! *ALL* messages have been read by some user or other
typically within a few milliseconds of going online. So there's no
point in marking them as "read", because they *all* are. That's why
they're there: to be READ. Duh.
> "Headers" are downloaded to your local computer and of course can be
> deleted locally.
Not in Thunderbird, they can't! Not that I know of! That is the whole
point of this conversation!!! If you know a way, please tell!!!!!!!!!!!
***** This is when I mentioned my solution of downloading messages to
Local Folders or other folder and then deleting them.
> What I do is to select a group of messages in one particular group of
> threads and drag/drop them to my Local Folders or other folder created
> for that purpose.
You can't drag a Usenet header to "Local Folders".
***** He tells me I can't do this but I've been doing just that for
years. And he goes on and on about marking as read on the server
ad nauseum ...
So in summary, he asked about editing the MSF file either manually or
automatically as a function in Thunderbird and I answered that very
question with a solution.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously he doesn't grasp the functionality of delete, cancel, read and
unread regarding the removal of headers and messages from the local
system. IOW, it cannot be done manually or functionally in TB by editing
the MSF files that he mentioned earlier. I proposed my solution that
works but he didn't grasp it.
I give up. Time to move on, he thinks he has the workaround and is
satisfied with it.
goodwin
I was trying to find a setting for loading unread messages only and the
only place I found was in the Offline dialog.
So either there or manual config edit of that preference.
Where do you set it?
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
Set VIEW => Messages to Unread and when you download messages only
UNread will be viewed.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> Where do you set it?
Correction ...
Set:
View => Threads => Unread
View => Messages => All
goodwin
> On 24.05.2010 17:11, goodwin wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> Where do you set it?
>
> Correction ...
>
> Set:
>
> View => Threads => Unread
> View => Messages => All
>
Sorry, Jay, I know those settings - been using them forever.
Are you sating they set that mail.server.serverx.download,etc. preference?
Or is that set by the option in the Offline settings dialog?
Having never seen that preference, and having in my prefs listed on only
1 news server and not 2 others, those 2 others which use the same view
settings as you suggest/I use - I'm confused.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> On 05/24/2010 03:56 PM Jay Garcia scribbled:
>
>> On 24.05.2010 17:11, goodwin wrote:
>>
>> --- Original Message ---
>>
>>> Where do you set it?
>>
>> Correction ...
>>
>> Set:
>>
>> View => Threads => Unread
>> View => Messages => All
>>
>
> Sorry, Jay, I know those settings - been using them forever.
>
> Are you sating they set that mail.server.serverx.download,etc. preference?
> Or is that set by the option in the Offline settings dialog?
>
> Having never seen that preference, and having in my prefs listed on only
> 1 news server and not 2 others, those 2 others which use the same view
> settings as you suggest/I use - I'm confused.
When you use those settings, all you download are unread messages, in
effect of course because it's a "view" setting.
If you don't see that config line then create it and set to "true", see
what happens. Set it for the server number of your news server.
Timo Pietilä
> On 24.05.2010 14:09, Timo Pietil� wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> Jay Garcia wrote:
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> Yes it is. There just isn't delete for individual messages, which is
>>>> something that IMO there should be. There is "ignore thread" which makes
>>>> entire threads disappear, so the mechanism is there, just the UI is
>>>> missing. I think delete should do that instead of trying to cancel
>>>> messages. Cancel could be something you find in menus. Maybe in "other
>>>> actions" -dropdown button in TB3 header section.
>>> Sorry you still don't get it. I'm not going to keep repeating myself any
>>> longer ... Cheers and good luck.
>> I pretty much think I did get it, but you didn't. Some people just are
>> blind to their own mistakes and I guess you are one of them. I can't
>> explain where you did go wrong more clearly, so if you didn't get it
>> this time this debate is obviously pointless.
>>
>
> This is the conversation I continually refer to:
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Robie Hately says:
>
> What we're asking is *THIS*:
>
> "How can a Thunderbird user delete specific downloaded Usenet headers
> (and the messages behind the headers, if they've been read and hence
> downloaded) from our own home computers?"
>
> I'm not taking "it can't be done" as an answer. If nothing else, I
> could probably do it by going into the news headers-and-messages files
> and manually editing the damn things in a text editor such as NoteTab
> (or a binary editor such as HXD or NEO if they're not text).
> But I'm hoping someone knows an easier way.
Note the part in parenthesis "(and the messages..." and the part with
"If nothing else...". Editing the files is the last resort.
This is about messages he sees in TB UI. Not about how to empty some
files in TB profile directory.
His approach to the problem is a problem here, but it is quite clear
that this is not about contents of the files, it is about the message list.
> **** And then this:
>
>> Timo, where are these messages? I don't work off line, maybe tats >
>> it, but i don't have a lot of dead stuff lying about....
>
> **** To which Robie Hatley replied:
>
> Thunderbird keeps Usenet headers and message bodies in the same place
> whether you work "online" or "offline". They are kept in "msf" files
> in the following folder:
>
> C:\Documents and Settings\your_user_id\Application Data\Thunderbird\
> Profiles\a1b2c3d4.default\News\news.your-server-name.com\
>
> One file exist for each Usenet newsgroup, named the same as the group,
> with an "msf" extention. Eg, the file for "comp.os.linux.misc" is named
> "comp.os.linux.misc.msf".
That one didn't have anything to do about his problem. It was just a
answer to a question about where those files are. Kind of OT for his
problem. I could have answered to that too, unfortunately I didn't and
it confused you to think that that one has something to do with his problem.
> ****** And then I said:
>
>> Yes, of course .. any files that reside on your computer can be
>> "deleted".
>
> We all kno that, Jay. That was never the question.
>
>> That's not the issue as far as I can tell.
>
> Then why are you talking about it?
>
> ***** And then he went off the track and started talking nonsense about
> the server rather than the MSF files that he started talking about:
If you noticed he said: "That was never the question.". This one should
have ringed some warning bells in your head that you are talking about
something else than he is.
>> Messages that reside on the host server cannot be removed or
>> otherwise deleted.
Notice that it is you here that talks about servers. So he follows your
line of thought.
> Nonsense. Of course messages on servers can be deleted. Eventually,
> they are deleted when the message age or data size reaches the limits
> of the server's retention. Also, some NNTP server operators delete
> spam messages, or messages with binary attachments, or messages which
> violate their TOS, etc. All these, however, are forms of censorship,
> and most Usenet users avoid subscribing to servers who do this.
Correct, nothing to do about TB UI though.
>> They can only be "marked as read".
>
> No, NNTP servers do not mark messages as "read". That would be
> nonsensical! *ALL* messages have been read by some user or other
> typically within a few milliseconds of going online. So there's no
> point in marking them as "read", because they *all* are. That's why
> they're there: to be READ. Duh.
Which is again correct. Messages in servers cannot be marked as read,
but they obviously can in your computer.
>> "Headers" are downloaded to your local computer and of course can be
>> deleted locally.
>
> Not in Thunderbird, they can't! Not that I know of! That is the whole
> point of this conversation!!! If you know a way, please tell!!!!!!!!!!!
That "headers" here is actually the message list. He does mention that
in few places if you go thru all the messages.
> ***** This is when I mentioned my solution of downloading messages to
> Local Folders or other folder and then deleting them.
Which does nothing to newsgroup message list. When you go back to
newsgroup those messages are still there.
>> What I do is to select a group of messages in one particular group of
>> threads and drag/drop them to my Local Folders or other folder created
>> for that purpose.
>
> You can't drag a Usenet header to "Local Folders".
>
> ***** He tells me I can't do this but I've been doing just that for
> years. And he goes on and on about marking as read on the server
> ad nauseum ...
That part he is quite right. You can't move messages from newsgroup to
local folders, you can only make a copy there. That message still is in
newsgroup message list, so that one does nothing to his problem.
BTW notice how he does talks about "header" here too when your message
refers to messages. In his mind those two are the same thing.
> So in summary, he asked about editing the MSF file either manually or
> automatically as a function in Thunderbird
THAT is what you got wrong. It wasn't about msf file editing. msf file
editing was only question about means to attain the goal which was to
get rid of specific individual messages in newsgroup message list. "If
nothing else...". He does not want to edit those, but he was willing to
if it would do what he wanted to do.
> and I answered that very
> question with a solution.
Which was to delete every header, when he wanted to get rid of
individual messages. So your solution was not an solution to him.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Obviously he doesn't grasp the functionality of delete, cancel,
Obviously he does.
> read and
> unread regarding the removal of headers and messages from the local
> system.
That too. What he is talking about is the message list. His messages
about the issue might have been somewhat unclear, but if you read them
more carefully and also the "workarounds" it is quite obvious that he is
actually talking about getting rid of spam messages on newsgroup message
lists.
> IOW, it cannot be done manually or functionally in TB by editing
> the MSF files that he mentioned earlier. I proposed my solution that
> works but he didn't grasp it.
I think he did, but because it never was about contents of msf files and
your solution does not remove those messages in newsgroup your solution
does not what he wanted.
> I give up. Time to move on, he thinks he has the workaround and is
> satisfied with it.
He has. The solution is to make filter and then force TB to redownload
all messages so that those filters do apply to them. That works. It is
cumbersome but it does work.
Timo Pietil�
John H Meyers
> You DELETE mail messages, you CANCEL your news postings on servers that
> do allow cancels. You cannot DELETE news messages off the server.
Thank you for confirming exactly what everyone else is asserting,
that the functions DELETE and CANCEL have nothing in common --
and therefore should never both have been attempted to be performed
using a single button (or key shortcut) that is named "DELETE"
DELETE (mail messages) is also a locally performed function,
deleting only from one's own computer (and message list on screen);
it never directly deletes mail messages from servers, either,
when one has set one's account options to leave mail on servers.
Thus, there should be a consistent DELETE
(only from showing up at all on this computer)
equally applicable to both mail and news listings,
and there should be a separate CANCEL for news servers alone,
which is all the case for various other well-designed "mail AND news"
products, but still idiotically handled in Thunderbird.
> But you CAN delete news messages that have been downloaded for OFFline
> reading. So ... the two functions are functional and as far as I am
> concerned can remain as such and I have no problem dealing with it.
I selected one newsgroup to download for offline reading,
downloaded new messages, and still could not delete them from my newsgroup listing
(not that it would help anyway, since the general idea of modern broadband internet
is to be generally on-line, rather than off-line).
The "Delete" button and key continued, as always, to be interpreted as "Cancel,"
despite your very clear explanation, quoted above,
demonstrating that these functions have nothing in common.
I conclude that you either have some other idea that you can't express clearly,
or else that your case hasn't a prayer of being supportable,
because even your own statements are such a perfect argument to the contrary.
--
John H Meyers
>> Then it's not been "deleted," and nothing useful has been accomplished.
> What has been accomplished is READING it and then MARKING it as UNread.
> It's not been DELETED because you CANNOT delete a message off a news server.
Perhaps you have never used a POP mail account.
The meaning of DELETE for a downloaded mail message
is to delete it from your own computer (and from the listing
of the mailbox in which it appears) -- if messages remain on the POP server,
the action of DELETE can not remove it from the server, either.
Even if you have downloaded only message HEADERS (which can be readily arranged),
DELETE still removes all trace of any message from appearing on your computer
(included its being listed in any message list),
while having no effect on the still-remaining message on the server.
There is thus a substantial parallel between how (POP) mail and news
is normally handled, at least by anyone who can follow simple logic,
and all of your shouting only deepens the confirmation of that parallel,
and heightens the evident absurdity of how Thunderbird behaves.
It is possible to try to defend "Delete" as meaning "from the server"
as a parallel to an IMAP Inbox, but since the basic idea of news reading
is one-way transfer to one's client, like POP,
with one sole completely distinct function (Cancel)
being specifically provided for attempted removal from a server,
I would regard any comparison of News with IMAP as rather weak and lame.
> Sir, please take the time to fully understand that you cannot delete a
> message off the news server.
And please take the time yourself to fully understand that no one has been
asking for DELETE to mean that -- we have all this while been asking
to STOP Thunderbird from trying to interpret DELETE as CANCEL,
and I appreciate your expressions of confirmation
that the two functions are utterly different,
thus that "Cancel" should be performed only by a completely
separate function, with "Delete" as a function which should be restored
to the exact same thing it means for (POP) mail,
which is to delete all traces of it from my OWN computer only
(including from my own local list of messages).
Perhaps the only way to make you understand these points
would be to give you a special version of Thunderbird
from which you could never even delete (POP) mail messages from being listed,
other than by hiding ALL "read" mail,
until someone else had deleted them from the server for you.
--
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> On 5/24/2010 7:52 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>
>>> Then it's not been "deleted," and nothing useful has been accomplished.
>
>> What has been accomplished is READING it and then MARKING it as UNread.
>> It's not been DELETED because you CANNOT delete a message off a news
>> server.
>
> Perhaps you have never used a POP mail account.
Perhaps I've been running my own mail server for 15 years and before
that running the entire computer network for a major medical school.
Perhaps we're NOT speaking of POP mail and/or mail messages but rather
NEWS messages. This issue has nothing to do with mail.
This issue has nothing whatsoever to do with mail.
> Perhaps the only way to make you understand these points
> would be to give you a special version of Thunderbird
> from which you could never even delete (POP) mail messages from being
> listed,
> other than by hiding ALL "read" mail,
> until someone else had deleted them from the server for you.
>
Thanks for the lessons but we're not speaking of mail but rather news. I
could get a whole lot uglier but first please understand that we're not
speaking of MAIL !!! Thanks
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> On 5/24/2010 7:45 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>
>
>> But you CAN delete news messages that have been downloaded for OFFline
>> reading. So ... the two functions are functional and as far as I am
>> concerned can remain as such and I have no problem dealing with it.
>
> I selected one newsgroup to download for offline reading,
> downloaded new messages, and still could not delete them from my
> newsgroup listing
> (not that it would help anyway, since the general idea of modern
> broadband internet
> is to be generally on-line, rather than off-line).
Download your selected news postings to either Local Folders or a folder
specifically created for news postings/messages. After that they are
treated as regular messages like mail messages and after reading them
you can delete them the same as you do mail messages.
> The "Delete" button and key continued, as always, to be interpreted as
> "Cancel,"
> despite your very clear explanation, quoted above,
> demonstrating that these functions have nothing in common.
>
> I conclude that you either have some other idea that you can't express
> clearly,
> or else that your case hasn't a prayer of being supportable,
> because even your own statements are such a perfect argument to the
> contrary.
I made it quite clear what the difference is between delete and cancel,
I need no further instructions nor does this issue need to be pursued
any further.
If anyone wishes to belabor this issue then do so either by email or
mozilla.general
Setting followup to .general
John H Meyers
> Robie Hatley's concern that I specifically addressed was that he was
> trying to find a way to remove specific message content from the MSF
> file. Thunderbird does not have a method to that on a per message basis
> as it is a case of all or none.
There obviously IS a method for removing messages (at least completely removing
from view, completely independent of "read" or "unread" or any other status),
as can be discerned from the very fact that if a message is no longer on a news server,
one can click a link shown within the "missing" message to remove it
(and all others in the same newsgroup which are no longer on the server),
without affecting _any_ messages still on the server.
All that one needs to properly implement "Delete," _per message_,
is to invoke whatever internal function removes the entry for
a specific _news_ message from its MSF file, the very same way that "Delete"
removes the specific entry for any _mail_ (POP) message from its MSF file.
All your ravings about "Delete" not applying to a _server_
only reinforce the fact that it's exactly the same for "news"
as it is for any "mail" (POP) server -- "Delete" always means
delete _from Thunderbird_, not from a server,
but Thunderbird stupidly converts "Delete" into "Cancel"
when attempted on a news account, and in the very same stroke
it makes impossible the act of removing an MSF entry,
which is perfectly normal and customary for mail.
> My solution to THAT specific issue is to
> download for offline reading all messages that you care to read and then
> afterward delete those you don't want.
You forgot to say how to "delete" -- the "Delete" button
still fails to delete anything here, at any time,
no matter whether in a group marked "for offline use" or not.
Even if it could function in this imaginary way,
it would require downloading all messages for all newsgroups
to accomplish a function which should require nothing more
than pressing "Delete" -- you do not, for example,
need to download a single complete mail message from any POP server
to delete it from its Thunderbird MSF file (which, again,
deletes it from Thunderbird without having to talk to or affect its server at all),
and it remains ludicrous to argue against doing exactly the same for news messages.
> The result is that there are no
> messages remaining in the MSF file(s). I have been doing that
> successfully for years. Those newsgroup messages that you refer to in
> the "list" are removed from view by marking them as read.
"Marking as read" has no resemblance to "deleting completely from Thunderbird,"
and the only thing which you have been doing successfully
is running away from the issue by eternally spouting
the same diversions from the obvious and only sensible conclusion,
to which you, too, would have to admit
if Thunderbird was equally as adamant about not allowing you
to delete mail messages from Thunderbird
until they were also deleted from their original POP mail server.
The one and only way to implement "Delete" would be
to do the same simple thing as for mail -- delete from MSF file
(and optionally transfer to some "Trash" instead)
whenever invoking "Delete" -- no contortions, no excuses,
no "give up distinguishing really read from really unread,"
nothing but the inescapable and only possible way
to erase this absurdity from Thunderbird.
--
John H Meyers
> Perhaps I've been running my own mail server for 15 years and before
> that running the entire computer network for a major medical school.
I've been doing about the same for my university,
for about the same time (16-24 years, depending on which branch
of the entire organization) -- since you are equally experienced,
then, it is clear that you know better than what you write.
> Perhaps we're NOT speaking of POP mail and/or mail messages but rather
> NEWS messages. This issue has nothing to do with mail.
It was _you_ who attempted to defend your position
by trying to compare mail with news,
then declaring "deleting" to be impossible for news,
because "it is impossible to delete from a news server"
(which, by your own vast experience,
you know perfectly well is meant neither by "Deleting" news messages
from Thunderbird nor by "Deleting" POP messages from Thunderbird,
_neither_ of which, in the eyes of most users,
involves any intent to affect any server at all).
Of course, everyone is fully aware
that what they mean by "delete" is identical for POP mail and for news,
and means to delete from Thunderbird only,
in every case having nothing to do with any server at all.
This meaning of "Delete," understood by everyone else but you,
and by most all clients except Thunderbird, is absolutely identical
for mail and for news.
The only thing which makes "delete" different for news than for mail,
and only in Thunderbird, is that Thunderbird DOES NOT IMPLEMENT "Delete"
for news, but substitutes CANCEL, which,
in everyone else's mind but yours,
and in every other client but Thunderbird,
is a distinctly separate function,
whose undesired substitution in place of "Delete from Thunderbird"
is profoundly objectionable.
The only way to attribute an iota of truth to your proclamations
is to interpret them as meaning "but in Thunderbird,
Delete just happens to be a completely different function for news
than it is for mail, and in fact it isn't there at all,
having been interpreted instead as Cancel"
(which your own argument makes clear
is a function having completely different intent).
Why yes, that's true -- and is exactly what should be rectified,
as everyone but you seems to agree.
--
John H Meyers
> Download your selected news postings to either Local Folders or a folder
> specifically created for news postings/messages. After that they are
> treated as regular messages like mail messages and after reading them
> you can delete them the same as you do mail messages.
When I create a "News" account, that account is most obviously
"specifically created for news postings/messages,"
but is never "treated as regular messages like mail messages,"
which is exactly what everyone else _wants_ Thunderbird to do,
without having to twist themselves into knots
to construct any "Rube Goldberg machine" to accomplish.
Definition:
"A Rube Goldberg machine is a deliberately over-engineered machine
that performs a very simple task in a very complex fashion."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rube_Goldberg_machine
Your ongoing attempt to whitewash this
is like a new car dealer attempting to whitewash a non-working starter
by saying "you can always just point the car downhill,
let it roll while in gear, and then it will just start itself."
"Or, just use this genuine antique Model-T Ford crank,
an exclusive bonus which only our brand provides with every car."
Any auto manufacturer would just love to see you as the CEO
of any competitor :)
> I made it quite clear what the difference is between delete and cancel
As everyone else already knows -- which is why what they want
is to _stop_ treating "Delete" as "Cancel" -- you are fighting the wrong war,
and just not comprehending what this is about (anything otherwise
would simply be called "trolling," to which of course you would not stoop)
> Setting followup to .general
Another order which need not be followed.
--
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Hey guys! Why don't you shake hands, return to your corners, and get a
better (real) newsreader? :-)
F'rinstance, mine has the choices - for news posts - of "Delete",
"Delete Body", and of course "Cancel" if it's my post.
A "Delete" and the post is gone forever unless I unsubscribe and
resubscribe.
--
-bts
-Four wheels carry the body; two wheels move the soul
David Pyles
Dave Pyles
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> On 6/1/2010 2:54 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>
>> Download your selected news postings to either Local Folders or a folder
>> specifically created for news postings/messages. After that they are
>> treated as regular messages like mail messages and after reading them
>> you can delete them the same as you do mail messages.
>
> When I create a "News" account, that account is most obviously
> "specifically created for news postings/messages,"
> but is never "treated as regular messages like mail messages,"
> which is exactly what everyone else _wants_ Thunderbird to do,
> without having to twist themselves into knots
> to construct any "Rube Goldberg machine" to accomplish.
You're not following this very well. AFTER you create your news account
and access a particular newsgroup it is then that you can drag/drop
messages over to any folder on the left under your mail account. This is
when they are treated the same as mail messages and subsequent archiving
OR deleted.
>> I made it quite clear what the difference is between delete and cancel
>
> As everyone else already knows -- which is why what they want
> is to _stop_ treating "Delete" as "Cancel" -- you are fighting the wrong
> war,
> and just not comprehending what this is about (anything otherwise
> would simply be called "trolling," to which of course you would not stoop)
You cannot delete a news post from the server and that is why I
recommended to Mr Hatley a way to remove selected news messages from the
MSF file(s). That is the ONLY issue I was responding to. It works.
>> Setting followup to .general
> Another order which need not be followed.
By you. And it is quite discourteous to not adhere to established protocol.
clay
> On 5/24/2010 8:02 AM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>
>> Robie Hatley's concern that I specifically addressed was that he was
>> trying to find a way to remove specific message content from the MSF
>> file. Thunderbird does not have a method to that on a per message basis
>> as it is a case of all or none.
>
> There obviously IS a method for removing messages (at least completely
> removing
> from view, completely independent of "read" or "unread" or any other
> status),
> as can be discerned from the very fact that if a message is no longer on
> a news server,
> one can click a link shown within the "missing" message to remove it
> (and all others in the same newsgroup which are no longer on the server),
[pot stirring]
'tis a valid point.
Shirley the mechanism that detects (and removes) expired posts could be
tweaked to also respond to the Delete key.
[\pot stirring]
Perhaps with an Add-On..?
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
Only one slight little problem. You have to WAIT until the expiry time
on the server is reached. Some servers I know of are one year or more,
some don't expire at all. The Secnews server was set for 60 days at one
time several years ago. You can get old waiting to use your "delete"
function. :-D
clay
If that is how Thunderbird recognizes expired posts, then it wouldn't work.
I'm inclined to believe there are other forces at work though.
Just today I saw a post on a newsgroup, posted today, that Thunderbird
flagged as expired.
The replies were still valid, only the OP 'expired'.
This post was from a regular poster and other posts by them, before and
after, were still on the server.
Maybe the OP canceled the post? S'pose I could ask them...
In any event, no time limit was involved.
John H Meyers
> You're not following this very well. AFTER you create your news account
> and access a particular newsgroup it is then that you can drag/drop
> messages over to any folder on the left under your mail account. This is
> when they are treated the same as mail messages and subsequent archiving
> OR deleted.
I followed it, but do not accept the attempt as anything that would ever
be acceptable as an alternative for correcting what is basically wrong to begin with,
even if the attempt would work as a contorted, temporary work-around,
which, unfortunately, it does not (see below).
I also found your explanations of why Delete and Cancel are totally different
(which everyone already knows) to be fine reasons to get behind the desire
to stop treating one as the other, rather than as any defense
of leaving them the way they are and making one of them completely unavailable,
and thought this worth pointing out,
as well as that most people's idea of "Delete"
would never have any intent to affect a server anyway,
as you repeatedly seemed to present as what it may mean to you.
Many months before this thread even started, I had already tried
dragging news messages to "mailboxes," as you seem to suggest above,
and I had already found this to be of no use at all,
given these just-repeated observations under TB 3.0.4 (Windows):
o Dragged messages do not get removed from their original newsgroup list,
which, after all, remains the only place where they can be downloaded.
o After having been the target of any such drag,
The Local Folders "Inbox" (or any other mailbox)
no longer acts like a mailbox at all.
Instead, clicking on any dragged-to target mailbox
now produces a right-pane display exactly like what occurs
by clicking directly on any main account.
This display, labeled "Thunderbird Mail - Inbox," for example,
is identical to what appears
when "Local Folders" (or any mail account) is clicked,
save only for the word "Inbox" replacing "Local Folders" or an account name,
and having the exact same "action list" as other mail accounts,
such as "View settings for this account" etc. -- because of this,
no list of the _contents_ of what used to be a mailbox now ever displays at all,
while the former "mailbox" is pretending instead to be an "account."
The "spinning wheel" also begins to churn endlessly
when any such former "mailbox" is clicked upon;
the result is thus not only a failure to accomplish what was desired,
but a destruction of the entire previously usable mailbox,
or at least of any access to it.
A previous experiment with trying to move _multiple_ news messages
to a "Trash" folder in a mail account
also resulted in a maximum of ONE such message ever even being copied,
which again rendered the entire exercise a complete and total failure,
not usable for anything whatsoever, not even as an emergency stopgap
while waiting for a future version of Thunderbird
to restore sanity to the normal meaning of "Delete,"
and to separate that normal meaning from any confusion with "Cancel."
> It is quite discourteous to not adhere to established protocol.
I think it quite discourteous to attempt to quash a thread about Thunderbird
by diverting it to a far less relevant location, apart from the existing discussion,
including the attempt to continue doing it sneakily
by inserting more "follow-up to" without even mentioning it.
I have no intention of continuing the discussion indefinitely, without good reason,
but I also decline to have debate and new information arbitrarily terminated at any point,
by someone merely saying "I don't want to hear any rebuttal" (so don't read it, then)
when what I deem to be some worthwhile additional information or perspective
can be added, for the sake of anyone who may find it deepening
their own complete knowledge and perspective,
and, finally, as progress towards making the best case possible
for a request to modify Thunderbird and remove these blemishes, to become a finer client.
--
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
Expired posts are determined by the expiry time set by the NNTP server
admin, not by TB or any other newsreader. However, different news
readers treat expired posts differently sometimes in the way they are
reported, etc. I admin the old Collabra and modern INN and that's the
way it works with those two.
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> On 6/1/2010 4:53 PM, Jay Garcia wrote:
>
> o Dragged messages do not get removed from their original newsgroup list,
> which, after all, remains the only place where they can be downloaded.
That is correct, they don't and the reason they don't is because they
cannot be deleted off the server.
> o After having been the target of any such drag,
> The Local Folders "Inbox" (or any other mailbox)
> no longer acts like a mailbox at all.
You can delete those messages after which they are in the trash folder,
mark them as read, archive them ... just like mail messages.
> Instead, clicking on any dragged-to target mailbox
> now produces a right-pane display exactly like what occurs
> by clicking directly on any main account.
> The "spinning wheel" also begins to churn endlessly
> when any such former "mailbox" is clicked upon;
> the result is thus not only a failure to accomplish what was desired,
> but a destruction of the entire previously usable mailbox,
> or at least of any access to it.
If that happens, exit/restart TB and the messages will be where you
drag/dropped them.
> A previous experiment with trying to move _multiple_ news messages
> to a "Trash" folder in a mail account
> also resulted in a maximum of ONE such message ever even being copied,
> which again rendered the entire exercise a complete and total failure,
> not usable for anything whatsoever, not even as an emergency stopgap
> while waiting for a future version of Thunderbird
> to restore sanity to the normal meaning of "Delete,"
> and to separate that normal meaning from any confusion with "Cancel."
You cannot remove news messages from the server - repeat this 100x. You
can only COPY them to your local system - repeat this 100x.
>> It is quite discourteous to not adhere to established protocol.
>
> I think it quite discourteous to attempt to quash a thread about
> Thunderbird
> by diverting it to a far less relevant location, apart from the existing
> discussion,
> including the attempt to continue doing it sneakily
> by inserting more "follow-up to" without even mentioning it.
The monitors have asked repeatedly to take discussions to .general once
the OP's questions have been answered successfully by the OP. It doesn't
make any difference whether or not anyone else agrees or not.
> I have no intention of continuing the discussion indefinitely, without
> good reason,
> but I also decline to have debate and new information arbitrarily
> terminated at any point,
> by someone merely saying "I don't want to hear any rebuttal" (so don't
> read it, then)
> when what I deem to be some worthwhile additional information or
> perspective
> can be added, for the sake of anyone who may find it deepening
> their own complete knowledge and perspective,
> and, finally, as progress towards making the best case possible
> for a request to modify Thunderbird and remove these blemishes, to
> become a finer client.
File a bug, it' your right to do so.
John H Meyers
While re-trying the (ill-advised) suggestion to drag some "news" messages
to some "local" mailbox, which resulted in the dragged-to mailbox
now trying to act like an "account" rather than as a "mailbox,"
I had only my "Sent" mailbox left to try for dragging multiple messages,
and I did, unfortunately, make that attempt.
Now, not only can't I display the content of "Sent,"
but after clicking "Send" for my last post,
the news server was contacted first, successfully posting,
then my mail server was contacted next, successfully mailing (to myself, elsewhere),
then a last step came up in a dialog box, announcing the attempt
to transfer my completed post to "Sent" in my Local Folders.
Here's where the "progress" indicator started spinning indefinitely,
which I had to give up on and cancel after many minutes
(normally this occurs so quickly that I have never before even seen
that part of the procedure display a dialog box and take any visible time).
I would now very much appreciate a solution to recovering my "Sent" mailbox
(ideally with its content preserved, if at all possible);
otherwise Thunderbird has just made of itself a dead brick,
and any wish to hear no more of me may be fulfilled
by my relegating its unimprovable dead body to the dump,
and moving on to some more decent and actually usable client.
-----
Someone named "clay" seems meanwhile to have agreed that
there must exist an internal function that deletes an individual news article
from its index file, much the same as deleting items from a mailbox index,
which could of course be invoked by a proper "Delete" function, viz:
> 'tis a valid point.
> [surely] the mechanism that detects (and removes) expired posts
> could be tweaked to also respond to the Delete key.
whereupon everyone's debating opponent has rebutted, as usual:
> Only one slight little problem. You have to WAIT
> until the expiry time on the server is reached.
This illustrates why nothing can persuade such a rebutter
that anything can ever be corrected;
suggest amending Thunderbird's limited route
to get anywhere different than exactly where it goes today,
and the answer is always a version of the immortalized response:
"you can't get there from here" :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bert_&_I
http://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/mt/archives/2006/01/you_cant_get_th.php
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKS_Ik5KGqc
In Boston, mind you, it may sometimes _almost_ be true :)
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/01/24/you_cant_get_there_from_here/
http://www.cartogrammar.com/blog/you-cant-get-there-from-here/
--
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> First, a brief "disaster" report (and "heads up" for anyone else):
>
> While re-trying the (ill-advised) suggestion to drag some "news" messages
> to some "local" mailbox, which resulted in the dragged-to mailbox
> now trying to act like an "account" rather than as a "mailbox,"
> I had only my "Sent" mailbox left to try for dragging multiple messages,
> and I did, unfortunately, make that attempt.
Again, you're not following directions. I said to drag/drop messages to
Local Folders .. OR .. to a mailbox created especially to drop news
messages to. SENT was never mentioned nor was INBOX.
To recover your SENT folder, exit TB, locate your profile/mail account
and the files SENT and SENT.MSF. Delete both files. Restart TB and your
SENT folder will be auto-recreated aknew.
EOD
John H Meyers
JHM:
>> o Dragged messages do not get removed from their original newsgroup list,
>> which, after all, remains the only place where they can be downloaded.
JG:
> That is correct, they don't and the reason they don't is because they
> cannot be deleted off the server.
Yet dragging mail messages does _move_ them from their "source" locations,
even though it also does _not_ delete them from _their_ (POP) server,
even if downloaded messages are also left to accumulate forever on said server,
hence the lack of valid reasoning, forever refusing to admit that the general
understanding of "Delete" (or transfer) means to delete (or transfer)
only within local (TB) storage,
with no reference to any server doing anything at all,
nor that causing "Delete" to attempt a "Cancel" is legitimately objectionable.
The only (tenuous) hold to validity here is the possible but IMO ill-conceived thought
to think of a "news" account like an IMAP account,
even though news is only downloaded, just like POP,
and is treated as "removable or transferable at will on local storage"
by every other client, as appears to be considered most sensible by most users.
> The monitors have asked repeatedly to take discussions to .general once
> the OP's questions have been answered successfully by the OP.
I see no "successful" answer to the case presented,
but only steadfast dismissal of all thoughts raised,
neither adding points of merit to your own view,
nor finding any valid fault with the other view,
which seems to have many more who agree with it.
If you think that all has been successfully answered,
why don't you set an example,
and divert only your own next reply to ".general" instead?
> File a bug, it's your right to do so.
And to discuss and gather opinions here.
Thank you for a stimulating discussion.
--
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
> Thank you for a stimulating discussion.
I quit and the reason is that you still do not understand that NEWS
messages are NOT akin to POP and there is no relationship of news
messages to IMAP either, altogether different protocols.
The question I addressed solely was brought up by Robbie Hatley who
reported that he found the workaround and was satisfied and therefore
that was that.
Good luck.
John H Meyers
> Again, you're not following directions.
> I said to drag/drop messages to Local Folders
"Local Folders" (an account) does not accept dragged messages.
Only mailboxes _under_ the "Local Folders" account accept dragging,
and that's exactly where I dragged them (with seriously bad effects,
as previously mentioned)
> .. OR .. to a mailbox created especially to drop news
> messages to. SENT was never mentioned nor was INBOX.
Quoting precisely what _was_ said earlier:
> Download your selected news postings to either Local Folders or a folder
> specifically created for news postings/messages. After that they are
> treated as regular messages like mail messages and after reading them
> you can delete them the same as you do mail messages.
The only Local Folders which existed happened to be the already defined
Inbox, Drafts, Sent, Trash, etc. -- why should I think not to try to use
any of those which already existed?
I have, however, just created a brand new folder of my own,
under Local Folders, which gets a yellow "folder-like" icon.
After dragging some news messages to this new folder, guess what?
Same behavior as before -- it now acts like an "Account" when clicked,
rather than like a "Mailbox," and displays only what an "Account"
(named "Thunderbird Mail - News") normally displays,
rather then listing any messages.
Now:
> To recover your SENT folder, exit TB, locate your profile/mail account
> and the files SENT and SENT.MSF. Delete both files. Restart TB and your
> SENT folder will be auto-recreated anew.
Thank you for the suggestions; merely restarting TB sufficed,
without deleting (and losing) all my original content,
as following your directions would have accomplished;
this is evidently also as I had once before discovered,
although having forgotten over the long time since.
All the same, I would not recommend relying on the suggested notions at all,
much as I would not rely on any car whose brake pedal goes all the way to the floor
and does nothing, even if subsequently pumping up and down did re-enable braking,
on a couple of fortunate occasions.
Finally, the entire exercise still accomplishes nothing --
you can only make _extra copies_ of posted messages,
in a place different than where incoming postings still arrive
(and are forced to remain on display, locally,
until removed from original remote server),
and then you can subsequently delete only those same _extra copies_,
returning to exactly where you were before exerting yourself for nothing,
but you still can not "Delete" anything at all
from the original (and still permanent) _local_ storage index
where they always exist to begin with, and can't be removed,
like a TV tuned to a 24-hour perpetual porn show,
which you can't turn off (nor delete from your personal home DVR or VCR)
for the following "reason" (exactly parallel to that offered earlier by Jay):
| "Because" you can't delete the originally broadcast material
| from the transmitting studio.
What would you think of a DVR that refused to allow you to erase anything,
until the original broadcaster gave you permission?
Waste your time on making extra copies then being able to delete only those, folks,
if you ever only need a pure boondoggle, which is:
–noun
"Work of little or no value done merely to keep or look busy."
"A project funded by the federal government out of political favoritism
that is of no real value to the community or the nation."
–verb (used with object)
"To deceive or attempt to deceive:
to boondoggle investors into a financial scheme."
--
John H Meyers
> Hey guys! Why don't you shake hands, return to your corners,
> and get a better (real) newsreader? :-)
Trying to make the case
for making Thunderbird into one of those :)
> F'rinstance, mine has the choices - for news posts - of "Delete",
> "Delete Body", and of course "Cancel" if it's my post.
> A "Delete" and the post is gone forever
> unless I unsubscribe and resubscribe.
As of course it should be,
even if Thunderbird postpones its ever rising again to greatness:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/south-postpones-rising-again-for-yet-another-year,377/
--
Christian Riechers
>
> Backstory: For those of you who don't realize it, TB3 has the
> following 4 bugs regarding filtering and deletion of downloaded
> Usenet headers:
> 1. You can't delete headers.
Upgraded to TB3.0.5 just recently.
There were a couple of spam messages in Mozilla newsgroups today. With a
spam message selected I just hit 'k', and the message got marked with a
little red symbol in the thread column. Went on to another group and
eventually came back to the first one. The annoying message was removed
from the view. Same goes for an entire thread.
If that was a change in 3.0.5, it's good news. My understanding was,
before one could only kill an entire thread or a sub thread, and replies
to an annoying message were not shown, but the annoying message itself
was still visible. This problem seems to be solved now.
--
Christian
John H Meyers
> Upgraded to TB3.0.5 just recently.
> There were a couple of spam messages in Mozilla newsgroups today. With a
> spam message selected I just hit 'k', and the message got marked with a
> little red symbol in the thread column. Went on to another group and
> eventually came back to the first one. The annoying message was removed
> from the view. Same goes for an entire thread.
> If that was a change in 3.0.5, it's good news. My understanding was,
> before one could only kill an entire thread or a sub thread, and replies
> to an annoying message were not shown, but the annoying message itself
> was still visible. This problem seems to be solved now.
I've just updated to 3.0.5
Tried to remove a spam message from my sight, in this group,
by typing "k" when it was selected, but the message remains in view
(I am not in "thread" view, and see nothing happen at all).
Next time opening the group, then the message does seem to be gone,
but, where has it gone? I can't find it anywhere now.
Suppose the typing of "k" happened by mistake, then --
how would one undo this?
--
John H Meyers
> Suppose the typing of "k" happened by mistake, then --
> how would one undo this?
In other words, there is no confirmation prompt,
so no chance to correct any accidental keypress.
Also, I tried in thread view -- upon hitting a "k"
the view instantly jumped far away from the original message;
upon scrolling back, the topmost message of my thread
has a "red dot" or "red circle" on it -- what am I trashing, then,
one message in the middle of a thread, or the entire thread?
Is this "k" shortcut explained somewhere, or in some menu?
Thanks.
--
Timo Pietilä
> On 6/21/2010 7:39 PM, I wrote:
>
>> Suppose the typing of "k" happened by mistake, then --
>> how would one undo this?
>
> In other words, there is no confirmation prompt,
> so no chance to correct any accidental keypress.
>
> Also, I tried in thread view -- upon hitting a "k"
> the view instantly jumped far away from the original message;
> upon scrolling back, the topmost message of my thread
> has a "red dot" or "red circle" on it -- what am I trashing, then,
> one message in the middle of a thread, or the entire thread?
Entire thread. "k" is ignore thread, which basically kills all messages
in that thread. TB does not have any buildin method of removing
individual messages. That is what this hugely bloated thread is all
about. TB can kill threads, but not individual messages, so people need
to find workarounds to fix this lack of feature.
Timo Pietilä
Tarkus
TB3 can ignore subthreads, however (Shift-K). That will ignore the
current message and any threads that spawn from that single message
only. The rest of the main thread remains intact.
Chris Luck
> I've just updated to 3.0.5
>
> Tried to remove a spam message from my sight, in this group, by
> typing "k" when it was selected, but the message remains in view (I
> am not in "thread" view, and see nothing happen at all).
You won't see any change in threaded view either. An auto-refresh of the
message list would be a great help here. As a crude work-around I
customised the toolbar to include the 'View' combobox. When I've done
with 'K'-ing threads I click the combo to re-select the same view I was
using before - the killed threads then disappear.
> Next time opening the group, then the message does seem to be gone,
> but, where has it gone? I can't find it anywhere now.
>
> Suppose the typing of "k" happened by mistake, then -- how would one
> undo this?
Via the main menu: View->Threads->Ignored Threads
Select an ignored thread/sub-thread - shown by the red circle+bar in the
Thread column - hit 'K' to un-ignore the thread. The focus shifts to
the nearest prior unread message.
--
Regards,
Chris Luck
Chris Luck
> The focus shifts to the nearest prior unread message.
Beg pardon. That was meant to refer to the initial 'K'-ing when 'Ignored
Threads' is un-checked.
--
Regards,
Chris Luck
John H Meyers
> Entire thread. "k" is ignore thread, which basically kills all messages
> in that thread. TB does not have any built-in method of removing
> individual messages. That is what this hugely bloated thread is all
> about. TB can kill threads, but not individual messages, so people need
> to find workarounds to fix this lack of feature.
(a) There is no work-around that doesn't sacrifice more than gained.
(b) There _is_ a built-in mechanism for removing individual listed messages,
which is proved to exist by the fact that "remove messages no longer on server"
can remove even an individual message, but the internal function which removes it
from the listing is not made available for performance, on demand,
for items specifically chosen by the user.
Why can any other news reader do this so easily, while TB refuses,
and also while TB is the only program which confuses "delete" with "cancel"?
If major and glaring differences were for some benefit and superiority,
one could label all the others as inferior and lacking,
but here, I can only count TB as such.
Thanks again for filling in the details.
--