Tux

...making Linux just a little more fun!

What other existing RMAIL Emacs commands or techniques or mechanisms are useful for sorting out spam messages?...

don warner saklad [don.saklad at gmail.com]


Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:50:57 -0400

For nonprogrammer type users what other existing RMAIL Emacs commands or techniques or mechanisms are useful for sorting out spam messages more efficiently and effectively?... for example in RMAIL Emacs laboriously sorting out spam messages can be tried with Esc C-s Regexp to summarize by: ...

For nonprogrammer type users it appears that using existing commands for each session is an alternative to attempts at composing programs or tweaking others' programs or the difficulties of dotfiles.

C-M-s runs the command rmail-summary-by-regexp
as listed on the chart
C-h b describe-bindings
 
          Key translations:
          key             binding
          ---             -------
 
          C-x           Prefix Command
 
          C-x 8         iso-transl-ctl-x-8-map
 
          ^L
          Major Mode Bindings:
          key             binding
          ---             -------
 
          C-c           Prefix Command
          C-d           rmail-summary-delete-backward
          RET           rmail-summary-goto-msg
          C-o           rmail-summary-output
          ESC           Prefix Command
          SPC           rmail-summary-scroll-msg-up
          -             negative-argument
          .             rmail-summary-beginning-of-message
          /             rmail-summary-end-of-message
          0 .. 9                digit-argument
          <             rmail-summary-first-message
          >             rmail-summary-last-message
          ?             describe-mode
          Q             rmail-summary-wipe
          a             rmail-summary-add-label
          b             rmail-summary-bury
          c             rmail-summary-continue
          d             rmail-summary-delete-forward
          e             rmail-summary-edit-current-message
          f             rmail-summary-forward
          g             rmail-summary-get-new-mail
          h             rmail-summary
          i             rmail-summary-input
          j             rmail-summary-goto-msg
          k             rmail-summary-kill-label
          l             rmail-summary-by-labels
          m             rmail-summary-mail
          n             rmail-summary-next-msg
          o             rmail-summary-output-to-rmail-file
          p             rmail-summary-previous-msg
          q             rmail-summary-quit
          r             rmail-summary-reply
          s             rmail-summary-expunge-and-save
          t             rmail-summary-toggle-header
          u             rmail-summary-undelete
          w             rmail-summary-output-body
          ...


Top    Back


Rick Moen [rick at linuxmafia.com]


Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:47:34 -0700

This posting was held by Mailman, and I rejected it with the note "I'm sorry, Don, but you really cannot dump a 83 kilobyte pile of documentation onto a discussion mailing list. Either send only the relevant (small) extract or put it up somewhere on the Web and provide the URL instead of the full text. The mailing list software will always block posts with large attachments, and you'll end up receiving a rejection note like this one." However, here's the message with Don's huge inclusion severely truncated:

[[[ I clipped this out, as Don had already sent in his own truncated version (as Rick notes below). -- Kat ]]]


Top    Back


Rick Moen [rick at linuxmafia.com]


Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:52:36 -0700

I wrote:

> However, here's the message with Don's huge inclusion severely
> truncated:

Which modification and re-send I now see that Don had also done.

Don, FYI, you sent the 83 kilobyte variant of that message three times to the list, and presumably were notified each time that it was too large and therefore held for moderation.

That notification would have included a URL where you could have cancelled the held message. In the future, please consider using that facility, especially (e.g.) at the time when you sent the fourth, much shorter copy. Be kind to your listadmins, and it'll improve their dispositions.


Top    Back