Filters - accessed from different computers

[Wazoo]

Doesn't make much sense to me, but .... brought over from the spamcop.help newsgroup;

From: Herb Wolfe

Newsgroups: spamcop.help

Subject: filters problem

Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 06:08:25 -0500

Message-ID: <dckvp6$6dj$1[at]news.spamcop.net>

NNTP-Posting-Host: dsl-dynamic-209-50-9-100.oma.inebraska.com

NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2005 11:07:19 +0000 (UTC)

I log onto my spamcop webmail account from several computers. The

filters I have set up from the home pc are non-existant when I check my

filters from work, and do not work. I should have a total of four

filters, two of which are the same, with different names, for mailing

lists I'm on, but I can only see the ones set up on the specific pc, ie

the ones I set up at work, I can only see there, the ones set up on my

home pc, I can only see here at home. I noticed this when, at work, I

saw messages in my held mail that should have been allowed through by

the filters. When I went in to check the filters, they weren't there.

This is becoming very frustrating, and more than once I've nearly

reported a message that should not have been in my held mail. Is there

any hope of getting this bug fixed?

This should either be in the spamcop.mail newsgroup or the Forum.

I opened up a query for you in the Forum, found at

http://forum.spamcop.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=4643

[Jeff G.]

This doesn't make much sense to me, either. Wherever I login to my Webmail account, my Filters are still there. Of course, in order for them to remove (or take any other action regarding) any message in my Held Mail mailbox/Folder, I have to apply them while viewing that mailbox/Folder (which irks me no end, as there's no keyboard shortcut for doing so and I'm a keyboard user from way back).

[Wazoo]

Dumb question, not even sure how to phrase it ... any possibility of accessing one SpamCop e-mail account with different access privileges? The word "personalities" is floating in my head ...????

[Jeff G.]

"identities" have nothing to do with Filters, only with who you appear to be when you are composing a message and "me"-related display settings like the head icon and the addresses displayed in the "sent-mail" mailbox/Folder.

[rafferty]

Dumb question, not even sure how to phrase it ... any possibility of accessing one SpamCop e-mail account with different access privileges?  The word "personalities" is floating in my head ...????

31097[/snapback]

I was thinking something similar, since the settings are different. I thought they might be tied to the cookies, but I'm not sure. I'll have to check the filters from school and another computer at home, to see which ones show up.

I noticed today that one of the filters wasn't even applied. I found an email in my held mail from one of the mailing lists that I do see a filter for here at work. Are they being checked before or after the blacklists?

Is there an easier way to handle mailing lists, where the message is sent from a user to a list-id which does the forwarding, rather than a message sent from the list-id? Browsing through the forums, I saw a similar question from another user, but no answer. It's not really feasible to whitelist every single user of the list, even if I knew who they all were beforehand.

[Jeff G.]

I noticed today that one of the filters wasn't even applied. I found an email in my held mail from one of the mailing lists that I do see a filter for here at work. Are they being checked before or after the blacklists?

Is there an easier way to handle mailing lists

31482[/snapback]

A message is first received, which is when the blacklists are applied. Some time later, if it is still in the Inbox, the normal Filters will be applied when you do something specific like look at your Inbox or apply them manually (depending on your settings). If it was filtered or blacklisted to a mailbox/Folder, only if you apply Filters to that mailbox/Folder will that message be filtered (possibly again). The methods used by Webmail for handling mailing lists are rudimentary, at best.