[sylpheed:30325] Re: junk filtering not automatic

[Stefaan A Eeckels]

On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 08:35:05 -0500
Seth Kurtzberg <seth at cql.com> wrote:

> You misquoted below, as if my statement "I can't see any reason that
> is the case" applied to your statement about IMAP and exchange.
> Since I sent my email _before_ you wrote yours', that would have been
> quite a trick.

I replied to your mail, so you cannot possibly have written it after I
replied to it.

Here's how it went:

Randy Dunlap said:

> > > Sounds like a catch 22.  If it's not well-supported in sylpheed,
> > > the number of sylpheed IMAP users will continue to be small.

I said:
> > IMAP would typically be useful to people who want to access their
> > mailbox from a number of systems that are geographically distant and
> > linked through slow links, or have an OS that has a non-network
> > based GUI. 

You said:

> I think this is based on a flawed assumption, that implementing IMAP
> would somehow harm an effort to implement exchange.

> I can't see any reason why that is the case.

And then I replied to you, quoting you as follows:

> > I think this is based on a flawed assumption, that implementing IMAP
> > would somehow harm an effort to implement exchange.
>
> I certainly did not make that assumption - I merely indicated that in
> my opinion IMAP is a small market, why I think this to be the case,
> and that (if I'm correct) this explains why the feature has not been
> requested often enough to convince Hiroyuki to give it priority.
>
> > I can't see any reason why that is the case.
>
> One of the reasons why IMAP is not receiving much attention is, again
> IMHO, that it is not much requested, that the lead developer has
> limited time and has to decide what to implement. 

I had not replied to any of your previous mails, only to Randy Dunlap.
The suggestion that I (deliberately) misquoted you is baseless. The 
confusion stems from your top-posting, which makes it easy to lose
the thread. Sylpheed has an excellent threaded view - switch it on and
you'll see the thread quite clearly.

Take care,

-- 
Stefaan
-- 
As complexity rises, precise statements lose meaning,
and meaningful statements lose precision. -- Lotfi Zadeh