Help, Please........
Frank Robinson
but am trying to figure it out none the less. Anyway, I am trying to write a
script that will search a folder with thousands of files, rename them based
on characters in the file name with parameters that I have and then, move
(not copy) said files, based on file name to folders that correspond to each
file.
Here is what I have so far, but of course, it does not work.........because
I'm obviously in over my head!! LOL. I have since found out that wildcard's
do not work in VB, so that is my stalling point. Any help or pointers would
be cool.
'**********************************************************************
' *** $$$$$$$$$$ Health Systems [KPMW033b]***
'**********************************************************************
' RENAME FILES FROM NAVICURE
'**********************************************************************
My.Computer.FileSystem.RenameFile("C:\test\KPMW033b-151*", "BHS-151*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.RenameFile("C:\test\KPMW033b-270*",
"BHS-270*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.RenameFile("C:\test\KPMW033b-372*",
"BHS-372*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.RenameFile("C:\test\KPMW033b-782*",
"BHS-782*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.RenameFile("C:\test\KPMW033b-730*",
"BHS-730*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.RenameFile("C:\test\KPMW033b-875*",
"BHS-875*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.RenameFile("C:\test\KPMW033b-928*",
"BHS-928*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.RenameFile("C:\test\KPMW033b-961*",
"BHS-961*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.RenameFile("C:\test\KPMW033b-1295*",
"BHS-1295*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.RenameFile("C:\test\KPMW033b-1407*",
"BHS-1407*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.RenameFile("C:\test\KPMW033b-357*",
"BHS-357*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.RenameFile("C:\test\KPMW033b-1463*",
"BHS-1463*")
'***********************************************************************
' MOVE FILES TO RESPECTIVE DIRECTORIES
'***********************************************************************
My.Computer.FileSystem.MoveFile("C:\Test\BHS-151*", _
"C:\Test2\BHS\AETNA\BHS-151*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.MoveFile("C:\Test\BHS-270*", _
"C:\Test2\BHS\BCBS\BHS-270*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.MoveFile("C:\Test\BHS-372*", _
"C:\Test2\BHS\CIGNA\BHS-372*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.MoveFile("C:\Test\BHS-782*", _
"C:\Test2\BHS\KAISER\BHS-782*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.MoveFile("C:\Test\BHS-730*", _
"C:\Test2\BHS\KY PHYS\BHS-730*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.MoveFile("C:\Test\BHS-875*", _
"C:\Test2\BHS\MEDICAID\BHS-875*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.MoveFile("C:\Test\BHS-928*", _
"C:\Test2\BHS\MEDICARE\BHS-928*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.MoveFile("C:\Test\BHS-961*", _
"C:\Test2\BHS\MEDICARE TN\BHS-961*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.MoveFile("C:\Test\BHS-1295*", _
"C:\Test2\BHS\RR MEDICARE\BHS-1295*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.MoveFile("C:\Test\BHS-1407*", _
"C:\Test2\BHS\TENCCARE-BLUE\BHS-1407*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.MoveFile("C:\Test\BHS-357*", _
"C:\Test2\BHS\TRICARE\BHS-357*")
My.Computer.FileSystem.MoveFile("C:\Test\BHS-1463*", _
"C:\Test2\BHS\UHC\BHS-1463*")
Todd Vargo
> Lets start by saying that I don't know enough about VB to fill a thimble,
> but am trying to figure it out none the less. Anyway, I am trying to write
a
> script that will search a folder with thousands of files, rename them
based
> on characters in the file name with parameters that I have and then, move
> (not copy) said files, based on file name to folders that correspond to
each
> file.
>
> Here is what I have so far, but of course, it does not
work.........because
> I'm obviously in over my head!! LOL. I have since found out that
wildcard's
> do not work in VB, so that is my stalling point. Any help or pointers
would
> be cool.
>
> '**********************************************************************
The following will move and rename the files. No attempt is made to create
the destination folder structure nor check for existing files in the
destination.
Set fso = CreateObject("Scripting.FileSystemObject")
Set f = fso.GetFolder("C:\test")
Set fc = f.Files
For Each f1 in fc
MoveFile "KPMW033b-151", "C:\Test2\BHS\AETNA\", "BHS-151"
MoveFile "KPMW033b-270", "C:\Test2\BHS\BCBS\", "BHS-270"
MoveFile "KPMW033b-372", "C:\Test2\BHS\CIGNA\, "BHS-372"
'...
Next
Sub MoveFile (findstring, dest, newstring)
If Lcase(Left(f1.Name, Len(findstring))) = _
Lcase(findstring) Then
Wscript.Echo f1.Name
fso.MoveFile f1.Path, dest & newstring & _
Mid(f1.Name, Len(findstring) + 1)
End If
End Sub
--
Todd Vargo
(Post questions to group only. Remove "z" to email personal messages)
Frank Robinson
Private Sub LeftAndRightFunctionsAreNotRecognized()
Dim s As String = "kkkkkkkkkkkkkk"
' Option Strict is ON
s = Mid(s, 3)
s = Left(s, 3)
s = Right(s, 3)
s = LCase(s)
s = UCase(s)
End Sub
In the Code Editor Left and Right are marked as not recognized
Comments
The error description is:
Error 2 'Public ReadOnly Property Right() As Integer' has no parameters and its return type cannot be indexed.
Posted by Torsten Borg on 10/11/2005 at 11:32 AM
Hi and thank you for submitting this issue,Your code was in a System.Windows.Forms.Form class. This class itself has two properties called Left and Right (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dza70hfb(en-US,VS.80).aspx). The compiler will look at these 2 properties first to verify your code and this caused the compiler error.Please refer to Visual Basic's runtime Left and Right function using the full name (with Microsoft.VisualBasic namespace) like this:
s = Microsoft.VisualBasic.Left(s, 3)
s = Microsoft.VisualBasic.Right(s, 3)
Todd Vargo
--
Todd Vargo
(Post questions to group only. Remove "z" to email personal messages)
"Frank Robinson" <fr...@frankrobinson.com> wrote in message news:88F7A239-5EA8-4FBF...@microsoft.com...
Stefan Kanthak
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Your address is wrong!
[...]
> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004F_01C9A296.5E8F1800"
[...]
> ------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C9A296.5E8F1800
> Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
Will (some of) you EVER learn how to setup your NUA properly?!
AARRGGHH!
Stefan
Todd Vargo
"Stefan Kanthak" <postmaster@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Your address is wrong!
> "Todd Vargo" <tlv...@sbcglobal.netz> wrote:
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Your address is wrong!
duh! I provide simple instructions.
>
> [...]
>
> > Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004F_01C9A296.5E8F1800"
>
> [...]
>
> > ------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C9A296.5E8F1800
> > Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> >
> > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
>
>
> Will (some of) you EVER learn how to setup your NUA properly?!
>
> AARRGGHH!
Your Outlook Express 5.5 can read it just fine. Find a new hobby. :P
Stefan Kanthak
>
> "Stefan Kanthak" <postmaster@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Your address is wrong!
You are cluless! Read <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc822.txt>
>> "Todd Vargo" <tlv...@sbcglobal.netz> wrote:
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> Your address is wrong!
>
> duh! I provide simple instructions.
For NUAs? Where?
Once again, for all you idiots who mangle addresses: display names
are for users, mail addresses are for the programs!
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004F_01C9A296.5E8F1800"
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > ------=_NextPart_000_004F_01C9A296.5E8F1800
>> > Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
>> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>> >
>> > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
>>
>>
>> Will (some of) you EVER learn how to setup your NUA properly?!
>>
>> AARRGGHH!
>
> Your Outlook Express 5.5 can read it just fine. Find a new hobby. :P
<http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt>
Stefan
Todd Vargo
> "Todd Vargo" <tlv...@sbcglobal.netz> wrote:
>
> >
> > "Stefan Kanthak" <postmaster@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Your address is wrong!
>
> You are cluless! Read <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc822.txt>
>
> >> "Todd Vargo" <tlv...@sbcglobal.netz> wrote:
> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >> Your address is wrong!
> >
> > duh! I provide simple instructions.
>
> For NUAs? Where?
Look who is calling who clueless?
Al Dunbar
"Todd Vargo" <tlv...@sbcglobal.netz> wrote in message news:O$vsSD1oJ...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
Al Dunbar
"Stefan Kanthak" <postmaster@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:efESLrKp...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> "Todd Vargo" <tlv...@sbcglobal.netz> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Stefan Kanthak" <postmaster@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> Your address is wrong!
>
> You are cluless! Read <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc822.txt>
>
>>> "Todd Vargo" <tlv...@sbcglobal.netz> wrote:
>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>> Your address is wrong!
>>
>> duh! I provide simple instructions.
>
> For NUAs? Where?
> Once again, for all you idiots who mangle addresses: display names
> are for users, mail addresses are for the programs!
Stefan: please grow up. There are at least two things wrong with the way you
are attempting to correct what you see as inappropriate behaviour in others:
.
- I cannot quote the RFC number on this, but I strongly suspect that at
least some of the official writings on netiquette issues would suggest that
referring to others as "all you idiots" is inappropriate.
- your continued haranging on your favourite subject has not had the desired
result of convincing anyone they are wrong and that they should abandon this
common practice. You seem to ascribe this fact to everyone else's idiotness,
whereas I feel your repeated failure should cause you to reconsider your
methods and/or your belief.
Further to that last point, given that nobody else here (at least as far as
I can remember) has echoed or confirmed your particular interpertation of
the RFC's you regularly refer to. It might not be just Stefan against all
those with mangled addresses, but Stefan against everyone else. I don't know
about you, but I regularly question my own beliefs when confronted with an
opposing view; should I ever find myself in the position of being the only
one holding a particular view, I would be even more likely to consider the
possibility that I have gotten it wrong somehow.
Do you have any reference to anyone other than yourself stating specifically
that using an obfuscated email address is something that should not be done?
/Al
Stefan Kanthak
| Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0106_01C9A559.C9517140"
Will you ever learn to setup your NUA properly?
Stefan
Stefan Kanthak
>> "Todd Vargo" <tlv...@sbcglobal.netz> wrote:
>>>
>>> duh! I provide simple instructions.
>>
>> For NUAs? Where?
>> Once again, for all you idiots who mangle addresses: display names
>> are for users, mail addresses are for the programs!
>
> Stefan: please grow up. There are at least two things wrong with the way you
> are attempting to correct what you see as inappropriate behaviour in others:
> .
> - I cannot quote the RFC number on this, but I strongly suspect that at
> least some of the official writings on netiquette issues would suggest that
> referring to others as "all you idiots" is inappropriate.
No! The so called "political correctness" is wrong. If someone abuses her NUA
like a moron she is a moron and deserves to be called a moron.
> - your continued haranging on your favourite subject has not had the desired
> result of convincing anyone they are wrong and that they should abandon this
> common practice. You seem to ascribe this fact to everyone else's idiotness,
> whereas I feel your repeated failure should cause you to reconsider your
> methods and/or your belief.
>
> Further to that last point, given that nobody else here (at least as far as
> I can remember) has echoed or confirmed your particular interpertation of
> the RFC's you regularly refer to. It might not be just Stefan against all
> those with mangled addresses, but Stefan against everyone else. I don't know
> about you, but I regularly question my own beliefs when confronted with an
> opposing view; should I ever find myself in the position of being the only
> one holding a particular view, I would be even more likely to consider the
> possibility that I have gotten it wrong somehow.
<http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=FH;De-DE;NGNetikette>
> Do you have any reference to anyone other than yourself stating specifically
> that using an obfuscated email address is something that should not be done?
Is google down?
What about <http://www.interhack.net/pubs/munging-harmful/>
GROW UP! Stop abusing the net!
Stefan
Todd Vargo
--
Todd Vargo
(Post questions to group only. Remove "z" to email personal messages)
"Al Dunbar" <alan...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:OuH8RwYp...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Al Dunbar
"Stefan Kanthak" <postmaster@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:%23kSEoNa...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Pardon? My address is, coincidentally, no longer munged, while yours appears
(to me at least) to be postmaster@[127.0.0.1]
/Al
Al Dunbar
"Stefan Kanthak" <postmaster@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:etpc2Uap...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> "Al Dunbar" <alan...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Stefan Kanthak" <postmaster@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
>
>>> "Todd Vargo" <tlv...@sbcglobal.netz> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> duh! I provide simple instructions.
>>>
>>> For NUAs? Where?
>>> Once again, for all you idiots who mangle addresses: display names
>>> are for users, mail addresses are for the programs!
>>
>> Stefan: please grow up. There are at least two things wrong with the way
>> you
>> are attempting to correct what you see as inappropriate behaviour in
>> others:
>> .
>> - I cannot quote the RFC number on this, but I strongly suspect that at
>> least some of the official writings on netiquette issues would suggest
>> that
>> referring to others as "all you idiots" is inappropriate.
>
> No! The so called "political correctness" is wrong.
My point behind using the term "inappropriate" was not that it is
politically incorrect to call people names, just that it is generally less
effective than other less impolite approaches that could be taken to get
your point across.
> If someone abuses her NUA
> like a moron she is a moron and deserves to be called a moron.
That is obviously your opinion. Does it say anywhere in the RFC's that
failure to follow the guidelines qualifies one as a moron or that it somehow
removes the person's expectation to be treated politely? And, more to the
point, where do you earn the right to call other people morons?
>> - your continued haranging on your favourite subject has not had the
>> desired
>> result of convincing anyone they are wrong and that they should abandon
>> this
>> common practice. You seem to ascribe this fact to everyone else's
>> idiotness,
>> whereas I feel your repeated failure should cause you to reconsider your
>> methods and/or your belief.
>>
>> Further to that last point, given that nobody else here (at least as far
>> as
>> I can remember) has echoed or confirmed your particular interpertation of
>> the RFC's you regularly refer to. It might not be just Stefan against all
>> those with mangled addresses, but Stefan against everyone else. I don't
>> know
>> about you, but I regularly question my own beliefs when confronted with
>> an
>> opposing view; should I ever find myself in the position of being the
>> only
>> one holding a particular view, I would be even more likely to consider
>> the
>> possibility that I have gotten it wrong somehow.
>
> <http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=FH;De-DE;NGNetikette>
Some very good points in this, including (courtesy of a google translation)
a few extracts below. Conspicuously missing is any reference to address
munging.
- Stay on topic of the newsgroup: The users want in a newsgroup postings
only look at the issue, because otherwise the quick overview is lost.
Perhaps a discussion of the issues that concern you would be better
conducted in a different newsgroup...
- Post under your name: When you post in the newsgroups no normal chat
nickname. With a real name you increase the chance of an answer, because
many users nicknames to evaluate technically oriented newsgroups as
inappropriate and unkommunikativ and read such postings not.
I mention this only because it refers to name not email address...
- Also in the news groups include good manners:
- - Be conservative when writing and tolerant when reading postings in the
newsgroups to communicate always people.
- - Take your time when writing and writing your posts, your posts speak for
you.
- - Personal attacks, insults, etc. are obviously in a newsgroup to find
nothing.
- - Be careful with irony and sarcasm, because it in written form is often
difficult to understand quickly and can lead to misunderstandings.
- Answers to questions from the newsgroup are generally returned to the
newsgroup. Do not answer the request by e-mail, which is considered
impolite.
- Post in the newsgroups only content that is of general interest and enrich
the discussion.
Perhaps a discussion of the issues that concern you would be better
conducted in a different newsgroup...
>> Do you have any reference to anyone other than yourself stating
>> specifically
>> that using an obfuscated email address is something that should not be
>> done?
>
> Is google down?
> What about <http://www.interhack.net/pubs/munging-harmful/>
Hmmm. If address munging is so bad, why do we not hear from, for example,
Microsoft, when it turns out this "abuse" is being perpetrated in their
public newsgroups?
OK, this guy has managed to explain the reason for your objection, but in a
manner somewhat more in keeping with the netiquette as described by the
previous link...
Todd: What do you think of the explanation in the above regarding how
"address munging is considered harmful"? Do you know of any authoritative
refutation of this?
> GROW UP! Stop abusing the net!
I think we both know from experience that telling someone to "grow up" is
unlikely to have any positive effect whatsoever... ;-)
/Al
Stefan Kanthak
>
> "Stefan Kanthak" <postmaster@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
> news:%23kSEoNa...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> "Al Dunbar" <alan...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> | Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>> boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0106_01C9A559.C9517140"
>>
>> Will you ever learn to setup your NUA properly?
>
> Pardon?
You posted HTML.
> My address is, coincidentally, no longer munged, while yours appears
> (to me at least) to be postmaster@[127.0.0.1]
Right, that's the "From: " address, which according to RFCs 1123 and 822
MUST exist on EVERY host connected to the internet, so this address is
perfectly valid.
Note the "Reply-To: " too and the respective sections in RFCs 1036 and
82[12]!
Stefan
Stefan Kanthak
>
> "Stefan Kanthak" <postmaster@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
> news:etpc2Uap...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> "Al Dunbar" <alan...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Stefan Kanthak" <postmaster@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
>>
>>>> "Todd Vargo" <tlv...@sbcglobal.netz> wrote:
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> duh! I provide simple instructions.
>>>>
>>>> For NUAs? Where?
>>>> Once again, for all you idiots who mangle addresses: display names
>>>> are for users, mail addresses are for the programs!
>>>
>>> Stefan: please grow up. There are at least two things wrong with the way
>>> you
>>> are attempting to correct what you see as inappropriate behaviour in
>>> others:
>>> .
>>> - I cannot quote the RFC number on this, but I strongly suspect that at
>>> least some of the official writings on netiquette issues would suggest
>>> that
>>> referring to others as "all you idiots" is inappropriate.
>>
>> No! The so called "political correctness" is wrong.
>
> My point behind using the term "inappropriate" was not that it is
> politically incorrect to call people names, just that it is generally less
> effective than other less impolite approaches that could be taken to get
> your point across.
I know. I'm speaking/writing frankly and point to the problem directly.
I expect participiants in a technical newsgroup to be able to "stand the
heat".
>> If someone abuses her NUA
>> like a moron she is a moron and deserves to be called a moron.
>
> That is obviously your opinion. Does it say anywhere in the RFC's that
> failure to follow the guidelines qualifies one as a moron or that it somehow
> removes the person's expectation to be treated politely? And, more to the
> point, where do you earn the right to call other people morons?
People who just reply with a "I don't care" when faced with remarks about
their inappropriate postings are morons. By definition.
Dont expect me to be polite when others lack politeness/good manners:
abuse (like posting HTML or the use of wrong mail addresses) are BAD
MANNERS and IMPOLITE.
>> <http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=FH;De-DE;NGNetikette>
>
> Some very good points in this, including (courtesy of a google translation)
> a few extracts below. Conspicuously missing is any reference to address
> munging.
Unfortunately yes. But fortunately <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt>
and others exist which state "A mailbox receives mail". A mail address
represents a mailbox. The rest follows from common sense: if you want
to communicate you have to provide a real address. If you dont want to
communicate: dont post!
> - Stay on topic of the newsgroup: The users want in a newsgroup postings
> only look at the issue, because otherwise the quick overview is lost.
>
> Perhaps a discussion of the issues that concern you would be better
> conducted in a different newsgroup...
There is no appropriate NG on msnews.microsoft.com.
And due to the inappropriate and invalid mail address of some the other
posters I can't send mail directly, as requested in RFC 1855.
> - Post under your name: When you post in the newsgroups no normal chat
> nickname. With a real name you increase the chance of an answer, because
> many users nicknames to evaluate technically oriented newsgroups as
> inappropriate and unkommunikativ and read such postings not.
>
> I mention this only because it refers to name not email address...
Lookup the definition of mailbox and mail address.
> Perhaps a discussion of the issues that concern you would be better
> conducted in a different newsgroup...
This topic has been discussed many times over the last decade(s).
Inform yourself and follow the common rules for newsgroup postings.
>>> Do you have any reference to anyone other than yourself stating
>>> specifically
>>> that using an obfuscated email address is something that should not be
>>> done?
>>
>> Is google down?
>> What about <http://www.interhack.net/pubs/munging-harmful/>
>
> Hmmm. If address munging is so bad, why do we not hear from, for example,
> Microsoft, when it turns out this "abuse" is being perpetrated in their
> public newsgroups?
Morons too? They even dare to propose to abuse <*@discussions.microsoft.com>.
Note the date of the above paper!
> OK, this guy has managed to explain the reason for your objection, but in a
> manner somewhat more in keeping with the netiquette as described by the
> previous link...
This is one of the many resources against address munging.
The first but is the definition of mailbox and mail address from the RFCs,
and the common sense.
So once again: if you want to use the net then respect and follow the
(mostly technical) rules.
> Todd: What do you think of the explanation in the above regarding how
> "address munging is considered harmful"? Do you know of any authoritative
> refutation of this?
>
>> GROW UP! Stop abusing the net!
>
> I think we both know from experience that telling someone to "grow up" is
> unlikely to have any positive effect whatsoever... ;-)
What about "Stop abusing the net"?
Stefan
Todd Vargo
...
> Hmmm. If address munging is so bad, why do we not hear from, for example,
> Microsoft, when it turns out this "abuse" is being perpetrated in their
> public newsgroups?
>
> OK, this guy has managed to explain the reason for your objection, but in
a
> manner somewhat more in keeping with the netiquette as described by the
> previous link...
>
> Todd: What do you think of the explanation in the above regarding how
> "address munging is considered harmful"? Do you know of any authoritative
> refutation of this?
Please don't feed the troll!
I provide sufficient information for anyone who really needs to contact me
by email. And yes, I do receive requests for help via email (by those who
can follow simple instructions) to which I respond that I do not provide any
help via email. Post questions to the group only, so others can learn from
the solutions.
Stefan Kanthak
> Al Dunbar wrote:
> ...
>> Hmmm. If address munging is so bad, why do we not hear from, for example,
>> Microsoft, when it turns out this "abuse" is being perpetrated in their
>> public newsgroups?
>>
>> OK, this guy has managed to explain the reason for your objection, but in
> a
Will you ever learn how to setup your NUA?
>> manner somewhat more in keeping with the netiquette as described by the
>> previous link...
>>
>> Todd: What do you think of the explanation in the above regarding how
>> "address munging is considered harmful"? Do you know of any authoritative
>> refutation of this?
>
> Please don't feed the troll!
OMG: no arguments any more?!
> I provide sufficient information for anyone who really needs to contact me
> by email.
No, you are just one more moron who abuses the net and burdens his SPAM
problem onto others. Remember: display names are for the users, mail addresses
for the machines. And just in case you don't know: NUAs dont read signatures,
GNKSA compliant NUAs even hide them!
> And yes, I do receive requests for help via email (by those who
> can follow simple instructions) to which I respond that I do not provide any
> help via email.
Yes, that's REALLY userfriendly: a poor soul tries to demunge your address
to contact you and gets brushed off.
> Post questions to the group only, so others can learn from the solutions.
PLONK!
Stefan
PS: I wish Moft would learn how to operate an NNTP server and incorporate
a simple DNS lookup on the domain of the user-provided mail addresses
to reject posts with munged domains/addresses!