 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Java Forum / General / July 2007JavaMail some troubles
i am noob in java programming/ but some days ago began to learn javamail library. and i hav't seen information, how remove mail from folder. can u help me? oi wrote (again and again and again): > i am noob in java programming/ but some days ago began to learn > javamail library. > and i hav't seen information, how remove mail from folder. > > can u help me? Someone take Google Groups outside and shoot it. Please. Dear oi, if GG ever lets you read this message, please download a decent newsreader, there's lots listed at http://www.newsreaders.com/win/clients.html On Jul 19, 5:24 am, RedGrittyBrick <redgrittybr...@spamweary.foo> wrote: > oi wrote (again and again and again): > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Dear oi, if GG ever lets you read this message, please download a decent > newsreader, there's lots listed athttp://www.newsreaders.com/win/clients.html Fat lot of good it will do him. GG still doesn't provide proper NNTP service (which is funny since GMail has provided poper POP3 service for donkey's years) and I assume if he's using GG that his ISP doesn't either. Where else is he going to use it? Surely you're not suggesting he PAY EXTRA for news access, which SHOULD be free/bundled with existing internet access fees (and always USED to be)? I suppose you'll later suggest he should have to pay extra to actually receive email too after paying for net access? Or maybe even for access to DNS? Where does it stop -- paying extra and separately for every different protocol and every single byte? Which megacorp do you work for again? I'm guessing it's one of the big and evil telcos, Verizon maybe, given where your sympathies appear to lie here and where your advice would end up funneling this poor sap's money. > Someone take Google Groups outside and shoot it. Please. I already have, in a manner of speaking, by simply killfiling any post from GG. sherm--  SignatureWeb Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net > > Someone take Google Groups outside and shoot it. Please. > > I already have, in a manner of speaking, by simply killfiling any > post from GG. How silly and elitist. >>> Someone take Google Groups outside and shoot it. Please. >> I already have, in a manner of speaking, by simply killfiling any >> post from GG. > > How silly and elitist. Speaking of "silly", how about hurling an insult at someone via GG when he's already mentioned that he killfiles all GG posts? You've guaranteed that Sherm is not going to see your criticism of him. Besides, it's neither "silly" nor "elitist". There is no ego-superiority involved, just a desire not to see the same posts repeatedly, then the whining from GG people who complain to this newsgroup instead of the responsible parties. Maybe he's not so much "elitist" as raising the signal-to-noise ratio of his Usenet perusal. SignatureLew > >>> Someone take Google Groups outside and shoot it. Please. > >> I already have, in a manner of speaking, by simply killfiling any [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > already mentioned that he killfiles all GG posts? You've guaranteed that > Sherm is not going to see your criticism of him. I'm guaranteed the last word, too. Or I would have been had you not intervened. :P > Besides, it's neither "silly" nor "elitist". Indiscriminately killfiling everyone who has posted or will ever post from an entire, very large provider is clearly quite silly and doing so from a belief that the users of that provider are disproportionately not worth listening to is clearly quite elitist. It's the 21st century version of blanket AOL-bashing in fact. > Indiscriminately killfiling everyone who has posted or will ever post > from an entire, very large provider is clearly quite silly and doing > so from a belief that the users of that provider are > disproportionately not worth listening to is clearly quite elitist. > It's the 21st century version of blanket AOL-bashing in fact. No one expressed that belief. They expressed a desire not to see the same posts repeatedly offered by people too selfish to wait for their provider. SignatureLew > nebulou...@gmail.com wrote: > > Indiscriminately killfiling everyone who has posted or will ever post [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > No one expressed that belief. They expressed a desire not to see the same > posts repeatedly offered by people too selfish to wait for their provider. Why do you reply to threads that you obviously haven't even f.cking read any of??? "I already have, in a manner of speaking, by simply killfiling any post from GG. sherm--" HE KILLFILED THE WHOLE f.cking NEWS PROVIDER, NOT JUST THE ONE USER HE FOUND ANNOYING. This implies a belief that ALL (or disproportionately many of) the users of that provider are not and never will be worth his time. Which is exactly what you are arguing he doesn't believe. The evidence says that I'm right and you're wrong. It's that simple, and anyone with a 3rd-grade reading comprehension ability would have made the correct inferences and come up with the same conclusion I did and not your diametrically-opposite one. Please, for all our sakes (including your own), unplug your modem until you've grown a lot of new grey cells. >> nebulou...@gmail.com wrote: >>> Indiscriminately killfiling everyone who has posted or will ever post [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > HE KILLFILED THE WHOLE f.cking NEWS PROVIDER, NOT JUST THE ONE USER HE > FOUND ANNOYING. There, there. No need to shout and swear. > This implies a belief that ALL (or disproportionately many of) the > users of that provider are not and never will be worth his time. Which No, it implies a belief that that source creates annoying repetition annoying repetition annoying repetition of the same posts. You are quite mistaken. > is exactly what you are arguing he doesn't believe. The evidence says > that I'm right and you're wrong. It's that simple, and anyone with a > 3rd-grade reading comprehension ability would have made the correct And you think the /ad hominem/ attack supports your logic? > inferences and come up with the same conclusion I did and not your > diametrically-opposite one. I completely disagree with you on this conclusion and the one you cite. > Please, for all our sakes (including your own), unplug your modem > until you've grown a lot of new grey cells. Again, insults serve to support your logic? Do you imagine that they are somehow clever or engaging? Do you think that impugning my grey cells in any way invalidates anything I've said, or in any way makes you look better? In fact, your descent into name-calling only indicates how very weak your position must be, else why would you stoop to such uncouth behavior? You are so very far wrong. Tsk, tsk. SignatureLew > > This implies a belief that ALL (or disproportionately many of) the > > users of that provider are not and never will be worth his time. Which > > No, it implies a belief that that source creates annoying repetition annoying > repetition annoying repetition of the same posts. It implies a belief that a particular news provider is inherently bad and since it happens to be where the poorest 90% of internet users congregate, it is tantamount to elitism. [Several violently rude insults snipped] Will you stop following up to everything I write to attack and insult me for Christ's sake?! Haven't you got anything better to do, a.shole? > And you think the /ad hominem/ attack supports your logic? You're one to talk, insulting me every single time you open your network connection and post another bit of drivel to cljp lately. > I completely disagree with you on this conclusion and the one you cite. Fine. Feel free to disagree. But stop insulting me just because you don't agree with my conclusions! > Again, insults serve to support your logic? Are you saying that my insults don't support my arguments, but your insults do support your arguments? That's quite the double standard! [Remainder of insulting twaddle snipped] Go away. nebulous99@gmail.com wrote in news:1185033158.491379.317090 @m3g2000hsh.googlegroups.com: > It's the 21st century version of blanket AOL-bashing in fact. When the majority of posts from such a provider demonstrate (as yours several postings do) such a lack of ability to engage in minimally civil discourse, then yes, one is justified in killfiling the whole provider. I've done the same thing to webtv and the anonymizing news servers - my news reader (and in this case, *my* news server too), my rules about what content I allow to be stored on it. So long, see ya in a year or so. Signature--------------------------------------------------------------------- Greg R. Broderick usenet200707@blackholio.dyndns.org A. Top posters. Q. What is the most annoying thing on Usenet? --------------------------------------------------------------------- What are your complaints with people using google groups? Or is your complaint merely than newbies tend to post that way? SignatureRoedy Green Canadian Mind Products The Java Glossary http://mindprod.com RedGrittyBrick wrote : > oi wrote (again and again and again): >> i am noob in java programming/ but some days ago began to learn [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Someone take Google Groups outside and shoot it. Please. from the message header Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com SignatureWojtek :-) > RedGrittyBrick wrote : > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com It would have to be groups-self-abuse@google.com. Google itself is responsible in this case; the user you're following up to isn't being abusive, but simply retrying a posting that has from their point of view failed by not showing up for tens of minutes. And they're doing so because some Google technician started jerking off in the machine room, accidentally kicked loose a network connector early in their activities, and remained too busy fantasizing about Jenna Jameson for several whole days to bother plugging it back in again. (Or at least this is a hypothesis entirely consistent with all of the observable evidence, and rather more plausible than most others I've heard so far.) >> RedGrittyBrick wrote : >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > abusive, but simply retrying a posting that has from their point of > view failed by not showing up for tens of minutes. So complain to GG and stop harassing this community. Since GG users know that they're using GG, they need to not abuse it by continual reposting of their messages. Just sit and wait (and wait, and wait) instead of selfishly and egocentrically spam-posting. The reposter indeed was abusing this group by reposting after a mere "tens of minutes". GG users should be responsible for their stench and not inflict it on those using real newsreaders. SignatureLew > So complain to GG and stop harassing this community. Since GG users know that > they're using GG, they need to not abuse it by continual reposting of their > messages. Just sit and wait (and wait, and wait) instead of selfishly and > egocentrically spam-posting. You actually do thing that GG users (and only GG users) should not retry apparently failed postings? > The reposter indeed was abusing this group by reposting after a mere "tens of > minutes". GG users should be responsible for their stench and not inflict it > on those using real newsreaders. You are just as much an elitist prig as Sherm. :P >> The reposter indeed was abusing this group by reposting after a mere "tens of >> minutes". GG users should be responsible for their stench and not inflict it >> on those using real newsreaders. > > You are just as much an elitist prig as Sherm. :P Nyaah, nyaah to you, too, since you want to play at that level. SignatureLew [posted and mailed] oi <alex.korsak@gmail.com> wrote in news:1184823385.095870.276730 @z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com: > i am noob in java programming/ but some days ago began to learn > javamail library. > and i hav't seen information, how remove mail from folder. > > can u help me? Please read the follow-ups to your several prior postings making this same request. Regards Signature--------------------------------------------------------------------- Greg R. Broderick usenet200707@blackholio.dyndns.org A. Top posters. Q. What is the most annoying thing on Usenet? --------------------------------------------------------------------- On Jul 19, 12:32 pm, "Greg R. Broderick" <usenet200...@blackholio.dyndns.org> wrote: > [posted and mailed] > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Please read the follow-ups to your several prior postings making this same > request. What follow-ups? There were none. None that he saw, that is. I find it disturbing that you jump to the conclusion that he ignored them rather than that his news service failed to show them to him, when his behavior is consistent with either theory and the former is not rational or easily explained behavior but the latter, given Google's track record with Groups, is if not exactly rational, at least easily explained. (See another posting in this same thread.) Free MagazinesGet these publications absolutely FREE for up to 12 months. There are no hidden fees and no obligation. Simply choose a title, complete the application form and submit it. Read more ...
|
Reply to this Message
|
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.