On Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 07:53:36AM +0530, Prahlad Vaidyanathan wrote:
> > manual.txt coming with mutt ;-)
> Well, that doesn't have anything on what scoring is, and why one would
> use it, does it ? or do I have the abridged version ? ;-)
ah ... you're right. Isn't there something on the internet?
Hi,
On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 Christian Ordig spewed into the ether:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 09:19:01PM +0530, Prahlad Vaidyanathan wrote:
> > Is anyone here an 'active scorer' ? Do point us mortals to some good
> > docs please ;-)
> manual.txt coming with mutt ;-)
Well, that doesn't have anything o
> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 16:55:39 +0100
> From: Cliff Sarginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Mutt Users' List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Negative scores and regexp questions
>
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 04:23:51PM +0100, Christian Ordig wrote:
On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 09:19:01PM +0530, Prahlad Vaidyanathan wrote:
> Is anyone here an 'active scorer' ? Do point us mortals to some good
> docs please ;-)
manual.txt coming with mutt ;-)
--
Christian Ordig
Germany
Hi,
On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 David T-G spewed into the ether:
[-- snip --]
> I'm in the same boat, in fact :-) What we really need is for active
> scorers to reply!
From what you say it seems like a real neat idea, but unfortunately I
haven't found any docs on it (Maybe I just haven't looked hard en
On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 04:55:39PM +0100, Cliff Sarginson wrote:
> > That's the point. Imagine someone you don't really care about.
>
> Ok, that is a good explanation.
> It still does sound a little complex (since you have been the only
> "active" scorer to reply so far, it does not seem widely u
On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 04:23:51PM +0100, Christian Ordig wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 06:00:36AM -0500, David T-G wrote:
> > I'm in the same boat, in fact :-) What we really need is for active
> > scorers to reply!
> ok. here I is one ...
> >
> > If you tried to implement all of that, with
Thus spake Cliff Sarginson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> How is that better than other filtering techniques? What you say
> sounds plausible, but is it the whole story ?
I don't use scoring, but you could do things a little more particular to
Mutt than just folder filtering, such as _marking_ for dele
Cliff, et al --
...and then Cliff Sarginson said...
%
% On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 08:22:04PM -0700, Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote:
% > On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 03:07:59AM +0100, Cliff Sarginson (dis)graced my inbox
with:
% > > I still feel very dumb on this.
% > > Can someone explain to an idiot what th
On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 08:22:04PM -0700, Rob 'Feztaa' Park wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 03:07:59AM +0100, Cliff Sarginson (dis)graced my inbox with:
> > I still feel very dumb on this.
> > Can someone explain to an idiot what the scoring is for
> > and how you use it.
> > The manual assumes y
On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 03:07:59AM +0100, Cliff Sarginson (dis)graced my inbox with:
> I still feel very dumb on this.
> Can someone explain to an idiot what the scoring is for
> and how you use it.
> The manual assumes you know.
> I assume it is some kind of super-filtering technique.
I don't ac
On Wed, Dec 12, 2001 at 02:19:33AM +0100, Christian Ordig wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 06:43:04PM +0200, Stefan Frank wrote:
> > Does that mean, that I have to add a "default score" to all received
> > messages before I can delete them (or mark them read) by score?
> yes, I think so.
> add:
>
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 06:43:04PM +0200, Stefan Frank wrote:
> Does that mean, that I have to add a "default score" to all received
> messages before I can delete them (or mark them read) by score?
yes, I think so.
add:
score ~A 5000
as your first scoring rule and everything should be fine (or
At Fri, Jun 29 2001 [09:31 -0400], Dan Boger aroused my curiosity with:
> >from the mutt manual:
>
> 3.20. Message Scoring
>
> ...
>
> Negative final scores are rounded up to 0.
Oops, I haven't read this sentence - sorry.
Does that mean, that I have to add a "default score" to all r
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 03:05:13PM +0200, Stefan Frank wrote:
> I have two problems with scores in mutt. Whenever the score of a message
> is negative, %N in the "index_format" shows zero and the settings in
> "score_threshold_delete" and "score_threshold_read" will never match.
from the mutt man
Hello,
I have two problems with scores in mutt. Whenever the score of a message
is negative, %N in the "index_format" shows zero and the settings in
"score_threshold_delete" and "score_threshold_read" will never match.
Example 1:
score '~s foo' 10
score '~f [EMAIL PROTECTED]' -100
If the messa
16 matches
Mail list logo
