what's up with sbcglobal.net email?

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by alan, Aug 8, 2009.

  1. alan

    alan Guest

    Bad enough that at&t (sbcglobal) discontinued the newsgroup access, now it
    looks their email service is getting kind of shaky

    Last week a friend of mine sent me an email from his yahoo mail (I even saw
    it in his "Sent" folder when I worked on his computer the other), and it
    never arrived.
    A few days later, I sent myself a reminder for a medical appointment -- it
    never arrived.
    Today, the same friend called and asked me if i got his email --- I didn't.

    I've been thinking about calling sbcglobal, but am not at all cheered by the
    prospect of speaking to "Bob" in Bangalore.

    Is anyone else experiencing less than reliable service via their
    sbcglobal.net addresses?

    Thanks . . .
    alan, Aug 8, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. alan <> pinched out a steaming pile
    of<h5ikge$nhr$-september.org>:

    > Bad enough that at&t (sbcglobal) discontinued the newsgroup access,

    now it
    > looks their email service is getting kind of shaky
    >
    > Last week a friend of mine sent me an email from his yahoo mail



    PORT 80, not PORT 25 or 110


    (I even saw
    > it in his "Sent" folder when I worked on his computer the other), and

    it
    > never arrived.


    Bitch to Yahoo.


    > A few days later, I sent myself a reminder for a medical appointment

    -- it
    > never arrived.
    > Today, the same friend called and asked me if i got his email --- I

    didn't.
    >
    > I've been thinking about calling sbcglobal, but am not at all cheered

    by the
    > prospect of speaking to "Bob" in Bangalore.
    >
    > Is anyone else experiencing less than reliable service via their
    > sbcglobal.net addresses?
    >
    > Thanks . . .
    >
    >

    No.


    --
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COaoYqkpkUA
    cageprisoners.com|www.snuhwolf.9f.com|www.eyeonpalin.org
    _____ ____ ____ __ /\_/\ __ _ ______ _____
    / __/ |/ / / / / // // . . \\ \ |\ | / __ \ \ \ __\
    _\ \/ / /_/ / _ / \ / \ \| \| \ \_\ \ \__\ _\
    /___/_/|_/\____/_//_/ \_@_/ \__|\__|\____/\____\_\
    §ñühw¤£f, Aug 8, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. alan

    rd Guest

    "§ñühw¤£f" <> wrote in message
    news:h5k1pq$25v$...
    > alan <> pinched out a steaming pile
    > of<h5ikge$nhr$-september.org>:
    >
    >> Bad enough that at&t (sbcglobal) discontinued the newsgroup access,

    > now it
    >> looks their email service is getting kind of shaky
    >>
    >> Last week a friend of mine sent me an email from his yahoo mail

    >
    >
    > PORT 80, not PORT 25 or 110
    >


    Out - port 465 ssl yes
    In - port 995 ssl yes
    rd, Aug 8, 2009
    #3
  4. alan

    alan Guest

    "rd" <> wrote in message
    news:h5k6a9$ft6$-september.org...
    >
    > "§ñühw¤£f" <> wrote in message
    > news:h5k1pq$25v$...
    >> alan <> pinched out a steaming pile
    >> of<h5ikge$nhr$-september.org>:
    >>
    >>> Bad enough that at&t (sbcglobal) discontinued the newsgroup access,

    >> now it
    >>> looks their email service is getting kind of shaky
    >>>
    >>> Last week a friend of mine sent me an email from his yahoo mail

    >>
    >>
    >> PORT 80, not PORT 25 or 110
    >>

    >
    > Out - port 465 ssl yes
    > In - port 995 ssl yes


    rd: Yes, 465 and 995 are the ports I've been using for out and in
    respectively , and they have not changed.

    §ñühw¤£f : There's no point in bitching to Yahoo, since an email from my own
    sbcglobal account to myself also did not arrive. Seems to be a problem with
    sbcglobal.net . . . .
    alan, Aug 8, 2009
    #4
  5. alan

    Mike Easter Guest

    alan wrote:
    > Bad enough that at&t (sbcglobal) discontinued the newsgroup access,

    now
    > it looks their email service is getting kind of shaky


    I'm not familiar with sbcglobal's mail handling, but I have encountered
    mailservices for other people which servers 'drop mail on the floor' --
    that is, the service (not the user) loses mail by deleting it with some
    kind of filter.

    My mailservice with earthlink and with gmail can be configured so that
    no mail is dropped on the floor. With either service it would be
    possible for the user to either configure to lose mail or to be
    uninformed as to how to find mail which appeared to be lost.

    Maybe you don't know how to configure or how to find lost mail on your
    sbcglobal mailbox or maybe sbcglobal actually lost your mail. I can't
    tell from this position.


    --
    Mike Easter
    Mike Easter, Aug 8, 2009
    #5
  6. alan

    rd Guest

    " alan" <> wrote in message
    news:h5k9r9$932$-september.org...
    >
    > "rd" <> wrote in message
    > news:h5k6a9$ft6$-september.org...
    >>
    >> "§ñühw¤£f" <> wrote in message
    >> news:h5k1pq$25v$...
    >>> alan <> pinched out a steaming pile
    >>> of<h5ikge$nhr$-september.org>:
    >>>
    >>>> Bad enough that at&t (sbcglobal) discontinued the newsgroup access,
    >>> now it
    >>>> looks their email service is getting kind of shaky
    >>>>
    >>>> Last week a friend of mine sent me an email from his yahoo mail
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> PORT 80, not PORT 25 or 110
    >>>

    >>
    >> Out - port 465 ssl yes
    >> In - port 995 ssl yes

    >
    > rd: Yes, 465 and 995 are the ports I've been using for out and in
    > respectively , and they have not changed.
    >
    > §ñühw¤£f : There's no point in bitching to Yahoo, since an email from my
    > own sbcglobal account to myself also did not arrive. Seems to be a problem
    > with sbcglobal.net . . . .


    I have no problems. None.
    Have you checked your online spam folder?
    rd, Aug 8, 2009
    #6
  7. alan

    alan Guest

    "Mike Easter" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > alan wrote:
    >> Bad enough that at&t (sbcglobal) discontinued the newsgroup access,

    > now
    >> it looks their email service is getting kind of shaky

    >
    > I'm not familiar with sbcglobal's mail handling, but I have encountered
    > mailservices for other people which servers 'drop mail on the floor' --
    > that is, the service (not the user) loses mail by deleting it with some
    > kind of filter.
    >
    > My mailservice with earthlink and with gmail can be configured so that
    > no mail is dropped on the floor. With either service it would be
    > possible for the user to either configure to lose mail or to be
    > uninformed as to how to find mail which appeared to be lost.
    >
    > Maybe you don't know how to configure or how to find lost mail on your
    > sbcglobal mailbox or maybe sbcglobal actually lost your mail. I can't
    > tell from this position.


    I'm not aware of any process I can use to find lost email; as far as I know,
    it's either there or it isn't. (Also checked my "Deleted" box where
    filtered-out email ends up, and the emails in question don't show up there
    either)
    alan, Aug 8, 2009
    #7
  8. alan

    Mike Easter Guest

    alan wrote:
    > "Mike Easter"


    >> Maybe you don't know how to configure or how to find lost mail on

    your
    >> sbcglobal mailbox or maybe sbcglobal actually lost your mail. I

    can't
    >> tell from this position.

    >
    > I'm not aware of any process I can use to find lost email; as far as I
    > know, it's either there or it isn't. (Also checked my "Deleted" box
    > where filtered-out email ends up, and the emails in question don't

    show
    > up there either)


    Explain exactly, precisely and verbosely, what you mean when you say
    that (paraphrasing you) - your *filtered* mail ends up in the deleted
    box.

    What exactly causes filtering that can cause any mail to go to
    'deleted'. That sounds to me like you have some kind of autodeleting
    filtering going on.



    --
    Mike Easter
    Mike Easter, Aug 8, 2009
    #8
  9. alan

    Mike Easter Guest

    Mike Easter wrote:
    > alan wrote:
    >> "Mike Easter"

    >
    >>> Maybe you don't know how to configure or how to find lost mail on

    your
    >>> sbcglobal mailbox or maybe sbcglobal actually lost your mail. I

    can't
    >>> tell from this position.

    >>
    >> I'm not aware of any process I can use to find lost email; as far as

    I
    >> know, it's either there or it isn't. (Also checked my "Deleted" box
    >> where filtered-out email ends up, and the emails in question don't

    show
    >> up there either)

    >
    > Explain exactly, precisely and verbosely, what you mean when you say
    > that (paraphrasing you) - your *filtered* mail ends up in the deleted
    > box.
    >
    > What exactly causes filtering that can cause any mail to go to
    > 'deleted'. That sounds to me like you have some kind of autodeleting
    > filtering going on.


    According to this sbcglobal antispam guide...
    http://www.ehow.com/how_2176025_use-sbcglobal-spam-filters.html How to
    Use SBCglobal Spam Filters -

    ....you can configure to autodelete spam "Choose the best option for how
    you want to manage spam under the "Spam Filter" heading. You can delete
    suspected spam immediately so you don't have to deal with it."

    .... alternatively, you could have configured to save the spam "You may
    want to click the circle next to "Save these messages in the Bulk folder
    for." Select an amount of time to store spam from the drop-down menu."

    Autodeleting is how users configure to lose wanted mail. Don't do that.

    It appears to me that you don't know how to configure your spamblocker
    so that you can find your lost mail.



    --
    Mike Easter
    Mike Easter, Aug 8, 2009
    #9
  10. alan

    alan Guest

    "Mike Easter" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > alan wrote:
    >> "Mike Easter"

    >
    >>> Maybe you don't know how to configure or how to find lost mail on

    > your
    >>> sbcglobal mailbox or maybe sbcglobal actually lost your mail. I

    > can't
    >>> tell from this position.

    >>
    >> I'm not aware of any process I can use to find lost email; as far as I
    >> know, it's either there or it isn't. (Also checked my "Deleted" box
    >> where filtered-out email ends up, and the emails in question don't

    > show
    >> up there either)

    >
    > Explain exactly, precisely and verbosely, what you mean when you say
    > that (paraphrasing you) - your *filtered* mail ends up in the deleted
    > box.
    >
    > What exactly causes filtering that can cause any mail to go to
    > 'deleted'. That sounds to me like you have some kind of autodeleting
    > filtering going on.


    Yes, I suppose you could call it that, as I set it up for myself by doing
    the following in Outlook Express:
    tools>message rules> mail
    1. conditions
    where the from line contains people (checked)
    2. actions
    delete it (checked)
    3. description
    (name of sender(s) entered)
    This results in unwanted senders' mail ending up in the "Deleted" box.
    There is no "Spam" or "Bulk Mail" folder in OE . .
    alan, Aug 8, 2009
    #10
  11. alan

    alan Guest

    "Mike Easter" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Mike Easter wrote:
    >> alan wrote:
    >>> "Mike Easter"

    >>
    >>>> Maybe you don't know how to configure or how to find lost mail on

    > your
    >>>> sbcglobal mailbox or maybe sbcglobal actually lost your mail. I

    > can't
    >>>> tell from this position.
    >>>
    >>> I'm not aware of any process I can use to find lost email; as far as

    > I
    >>> know, it's either there or it isn't. (Also checked my "Deleted" box
    >>> where filtered-out email ends up, and the emails in question don't

    > show
    >>> up there either)

    >>
    >> Explain exactly, precisely and verbosely, what you mean when you say
    >> that (paraphrasing you) - your *filtered* mail ends up in the deleted
    >> box.
    >>
    >> What exactly causes filtering that can cause any mail to go to
    >> 'deleted'. That sounds to me like you have some kind of autodeleting
    >> filtering going on.

    >
    > According to this sbcglobal antispam guide...
    > http://www.ehow.com/how_2176025_use-sbcglobal-spam-filters.html How to
    > Use SBCglobal Spam Filters -
    >
    > ...you can configure to autodelete spam "Choose the best option for how
    > you want to manage spam under the "Spam Filter" heading. You can delete
    > suspected spam immediately so you don't have to deal with it."
    >
    > ... alternatively, you could have configured to save the spam "You may
    > want to click the circle next to "Save these messages in the Bulk folder
    > for." Select an amount of time to store spam from the drop-down menu."
    >
    > Autodeleting is how users configure to lose wanted mail. Don't do that.
    >
    > It appears to me that you don't know how to configure your spamblocker
    > so that you can find your lost mail.


    Thanks for the information, but it looks like you're assuming I access my
    sbcglobal.net email via the web --- I don't. I access it thru Outlook
    Express, which does not have the configuration possibilities you mentioned
    above. Out of curiosity, I just now tried accessing it via the web, using
    the same password I use with OE --- didn't work, so tried the lost password
    feature, entered my sbcglobal.net address, and was told I hadn't provided
    enough information (!) and that I should call Customer Service, which I
    might do when I can set aside a 1-2 hour block of time . . .
    alan, Aug 8, 2009
    #11
  12. alan

    rd Guest

    " alan" <> wrote in message
    news:h5kgcj$ms8$-september.org...
    >
    > "Mike Easter" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> alan wrote:
    >>> "Mike Easter"

    >>
    >>>> Maybe you don't know how to configure or how to find lost mail on

    >> your
    >>>> sbcglobal mailbox or maybe sbcglobal actually lost your mail. I

    >> can't
    >>>> tell from this position.
    >>>
    >>> I'm not aware of any process I can use to find lost email; as far as I
    >>> know, it's either there or it isn't. (Also checked my "Deleted" box
    >>> where filtered-out email ends up, and the emails in question don't

    >> show
    >>> up there either)

    >>
    >> Explain exactly, precisely and verbosely, what you mean when you say
    >> that (paraphrasing you) - your *filtered* mail ends up in the deleted
    >> box.
    >>
    >> What exactly causes filtering that can cause any mail to go to
    >> 'deleted'. That sounds to me like you have some kind of autodeleting
    >> filtering going on.

    >
    > Yes, I suppose you could call it that, as I set it up for myself by doing
    > the following in Outlook Express:
    > tools>message rules> mail
    > 1. conditions
    > where the from line contains people (checked)
    > 2. actions
    > delete it (checked)
    > 3. description
    > (name of sender(s) entered)
    > This results in unwanted senders' mail ending up in the "Deleted" box.
    > There is no "Spam" or "Bulk Mail" folder in OE . .


    Go here:
    https://login.yahoo.com/config/login_verify2?.intl=us&.src=ym

    Yes, it's yahoo mail but works for sbcglobal.net addresses.
    I don't remember if "spam" detection is on or off by default. Look for
    folder named "Spam". I believe messages are saved there for one month before
    automatic deletion. While there set your spam filtering options. Or turn it
    off. It works pretty well though.
    rd, Aug 8, 2009
    #12
  13. alan

    Mike Easter Guest

    alan wrote:
    > "Mike Easter"
    >> alan wrote:
    >>> "Mike Easter"

    >>
    >>>> Maybe you don't know how to configure or how to find lost mail on
    >>>> your sbcglobal mailbox or maybe sbcglobal actually lost your mail.
    >>>> I can't tell from this position.


    >> What exactly causes filtering that can cause any mail to go to
    >> 'deleted'. That sounds to me like you have some kind of autodeleting
    >> filtering going on.

    >
    > Yes, I suppose you could call it that, as I set it up for myself by
    > doing the following in Outlook Express:


    What you set up in OE is a different thing than what is setup on
    sbcglobal.

    For purposes of discussion here, we will refer to your OE inbox as an
    inbox and we will refer to your sbcglobal as a 'mailbox' -- OE has an
    inbox; sbcglobal has a mailbox

    > tools>message rules> mail
    > 1. conditions
    > where the from line contains people (checked)
    > 2. actions
    > delete it (checked)
    > 3. description
    > (name of sender(s) entered)
    > This results in unwanted senders' mail ending up in the "Deleted" box.


    I recommend against having such a rule. In the first place, you should
    not manage spam with 'unwanted senders'.

    > There is no "Spam" or "Bulk Mail" folder in OE . .


    Correct. I am talking about what happens to your mail before it gets to
    OE. In the sbcglobal *mail*box.

    But/And/First of all, don't use unwanted senders for managing spam with
    OE.



    --
    Mike Easter
    Mike Easter, Aug 8, 2009
    #13
  14. alan

    Mike Easter Guest

    alan wrote:
    > "Mike Easter"


    >>>>> Maybe you don't know how to configure or how to find lost mail on
    >>>>> your sbcglobal mailbox or maybe sbcglobal actually lost your mail.
    >>>>> I can't tell from this position.


    >> It appears to me that you don't know how to configure your

    spamblocker
    >> so that you can find your lost mail.

    >
    > Thanks for the information, but it looks like you're assuming I access
    > my sbcglobal.net email via the web --- I don't.


    Even if you access your mail with OE instead of webmail, most providers
    who have webmail and a spam configuration do the configuration by your
    accessing the webmail function.

    That is, you *have to* access the webmail function to configure the
    provider's spamfilter properly.

    > I access it thru
    > Outlook Express, which does not have the configuration possibilities
    > you mentioned above.


    Correct. And/But OE is almost completely defective/deficient in terms
    of providing any useful spam function.

    > Out of curiosity, I just now tried accessing it
    > via the web, using the same password I use with OE --- didn't work, so
    > tried the lost password feature, entered my sbcglobal.net address, and
    > was told I hadn't provided enough information (!) and that I should
    > call Customer Service, which I might do when I can set aside a 1-2

    hour
    > block of time . . .


    The most common error that people make when they are trying to access a
    webmail account is some confusion over what is the username. Some
    providers use the entire email address as the username, while other
    providers just use the 'user' part of . If you don't do it
    right, then the pass won't work.

    The other error may be related to case sensitivity on the pass.


    --
    Mike Easter
    Mike Easter, Aug 8, 2009
    #14
  15. alan

    alan Guest

    "rd" <> wrote in message
    news:h5kgvn$rcl$-september.org...
    >
    > " alan" <> wrote in message
    > news:h5kgcj$ms8$-september.org...
    >>
    >> "Mike Easter" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> alan wrote:
    >>>> "Mike Easter"
    >>>
    >>>>> Maybe you don't know how to configure or how to find lost mail on
    >>> your
    >>>>> sbcglobal mailbox or maybe sbcglobal actually lost your mail. I
    >>> can't
    >>>>> tell from this position.
    >>>>
    >>>> I'm not aware of any process I can use to find lost email; as far as I
    >>>> know, it's either there or it isn't. (Also checked my "Deleted" box
    >>>> where filtered-out email ends up, and the emails in question don't
    >>> show
    >>>> up there either)
    >>>
    >>> Explain exactly, precisely and verbosely, what you mean when you say
    >>> that (paraphrasing you) - your *filtered* mail ends up in the deleted
    >>> box.
    >>>
    >>> What exactly causes filtering that can cause any mail to go to
    >>> 'deleted'. That sounds to me like you have some kind of autodeleting
    >>> filtering going on.

    >>
    >> Yes, I suppose you could call it that, as I set it up for myself by doing
    >> the following in Outlook Express:
    >> tools>message rules> mail
    >> 1. conditions
    >> where the from line contains people (checked)
    >> 2. actions
    >> delete it (checked)
    >> 3. description
    >> (name of sender(s) entered)
    >> This results in unwanted senders' mail ending up in the "Deleted" box.
    >> There is no "Spam" or "Bulk Mail" folder in OE . .

    >
    > Go here:
    > https://login.yahoo.com/config/login_verify2?.intl=us&.src=ym
    >
    > Yes, it's yahoo mail but works for sbcglobal.net addresses.
    > I don't remember if "spam" detection is on or off by default. Look for
    > folder named "Spam". I believe messages are saved there for one month
    > before automatic deletion. While there set your spam filtering options. Or
    > turn it off. It works pretty well though.


    Well, I'll be damned -- who woulda thought? Even though the sbcglobal.net
    homepage wouldn't allow me to log on (and it wasn't about confusion over
    username or password or case sensitivity), I was able to log on thru the
    yahoo login you supplied above.

    And --- lo and behold (just as you had suggested earlier) --- the emails in
    question were in the "Spam" folder.

    Looks like sbcglobal uses pretty arbitrary and eccentric criteria for spam;
    in any case, it doesn't seem to be based on the sender as most of my
    friend's emails did get through, (and one of my own emails to myself didn't
    get through), (ads from Carrot Ink and Contra Costa Times were in the spam
    folder as well, but I still get them in my regular OE inbox, so it doesn't
    look like the filter is applied consistently). Anyway, I moved the ones I
    wanted to the "In" box, and now they're showing up in OE. I also set the
    filter so that any email from this particular friend is to be placed in the
    In-box as well. If that doesn't work, at least I know where to look for
    "lost" mails now. I hesitated to disable the spam function entirely, as I'd
    apparently accumulated 129 spam messages in the last 30 days . . . .
    Thanks to both of you (Mike Easter and rd) for your help . .
    --
    alan
    alan, Aug 8, 2009
    #15
  16. alan

    Mike Easter Guest

    alan wrote:

    > And --- lo and behold (just as you had suggested earlier) --- the
    > emails in question were in the "Spam" folder.
    >
    > Looks like sbcglobal uses pretty arbitrary and eccentric criteria for
    > spam; in any case, it doesn't seem to be based on the sender


    Only foolish endusers would use sender as a positive discriminator *for*
    spam. Sender is useful for whitelisting, not blacklisting.

    That is, it is very common for the spammee novice to use OE's 'block
    sender' when they receive a spam. This is a very bad idea as it junks
    up a system and doesn't help with the spam problem.

    OE has very few useful message rules to help with spam. Sometimes an OE
    rule about whether or not your email appears in the To or not - much
    spam does not have your address in the To. Sometimes an OE rule about
    whether or not your email appears in the From - if you do not send
    yourself mail - is useful.

    > as most of
    > my friend's emails did get through, (and one of my own emails to

    myself
    > didn't get through), (ads from Carrot Ink and Contra Costa Times were
    > in the spam folder as well, but I still get them in my regular OE
    > inbox, so it doesn't look like the filter is applied consistently).


    Most well configured spamfilters do not use the From as a spam
    discriminator except for the user's configured whitelist.

    > Anyway, I moved the ones I wanted to the "In" box, and now they're
    > showing up in OE. I also set the filter so that any email from this
    > particular friend is to be placed in the In-box as well. If that
    > doesn't work, at least I know where to look for "lost" mails now. I
    > hesitated to disable the spam function entirely, as I'd apparently
    > accumulated 129 spam messages in the last 30 days . . . .
    > Thanks to both of you (Mike Easter and rd) for your help . .


    YW. It is good that you know that you need to look after the spamfilter
    on a regular basis.

    Spam filters which have false positives are problematic, as it is
    'dreary' to search thru' a folder which is full of spam trying to find
    the occasional goodmail. It is like 'dumpster diving' swimming in
    garbage to find something lost, which is typically at the bottom.

    It is a better filter which is custom made for the user. A well
    designed custom made filter should have zero as in 0.000% false
    positives, while allowing a very modest amount of false negative spam
    'leakage'. Leaked spam is easily found in the goodmail and handled
    appropriately. Captured goodmail in the spam is actually much harder to
    find and a lot more 'unpleasant' to look for and more easily lost by
    overlooking.

    So when you have a spam filter which you have significant power to
    configure, more than just the ability to whitelist, then you can make
    the filter better about not capturing goodmail and not missing spam.


    --
    Mike Easter
    Mike Easter, Aug 8, 2009
    #16
  17. In message <h5k9r9$932$-september.org>, " alan" wrote:
    >
    > "rd" <> wrote in message
    > news:h5k6a9$ft6$-september.org...
    > >
    > > "§ñühw¤£f" <> wrote in message
    > > news:h5k1pq$25v$...
    > >> alan <> pinched out a steaming pile
    > >> of<h5ikge$nhr$-september.org>:
    > >>
    > >>> Bad enough that at&t (sbcglobal) discontinued the newsgroup access,
    > >> now it
    > >>> looks their email service is getting kind of shaky
    > >>>
    > >>> Last week a friend of mine sent me an email from his yahoo mail
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> PORT 80, not PORT 25 or 110
    > >>

    > >
    > > Out - port 465 ssl yes
    > > In - port 995 ssl yes

    >
    > rd: Yes, 465 and 995 are the ports I've been using for out and in
    > respectively , and they have not changed.
    >


    So its a smtpauth server?
    Your mail client needs to support secure settings IIRC...

    > §ñühw¤£f : There's no point in bitching to Yahoo, since an email from
    > my own
    > sbcglobal account to myself also did not arrive. Seems to be a problem with
    > sbcglobal.net . . . .
    >

    You need to bitch to them then. They need feedback from you when shit-dont-work
    otherwise they aSSume its hackers trying to use your account.

    FYI
    --
    Proof of Americas 3rd world status:
    http://www.ramusa.org/
    "I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people
    by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and
    sudden usurpations.... The means of defense against foreign danger historically
    have become the instruments of tyranny at home."
    -James Madison
    §ñühw¤£f, Aug 8, 2009
    #17
  18. Mike Easter wrote:

    > That is, it is very common for the spammee novice to use OE's 'block
    > sender' when they receive a spam. This is a very bad idea as it
    > junks up a system and doesn't help with the spam problem.


    I once cleaned up a guy's slow-running computer, and found
    hundreds/thousands of "blocked senders" in that list. He would block the
    From ID of every spam he got - and was continually puzzled why he kept
    receiving the "same spam" over and over. Naturally, he didn't notice the
    From address was always different, even if the body of the spam was the
    same.

    "I don't wanna buy his stupid fake watches!!!1!!"

    --
    -bts
    -Friends don't let friends drive Windows
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Aug 8, 2009
    #18
  19. alan

    OldGringo38 Guest

    , In The Beginning God Created The Heavens And Earth, Then I Added My
    Two Cents To The alan Post:
    > Bad enough that at&t (sbcglobal) discontinued the newsgroup access, now
    > it looks their email service is getting kind of shaky
    >
    > Last week a friend of mine sent me an email from his yahoo mail (I even
    > saw it in his "Sent" folder when I worked on his computer the other),
    > and it never arrived.
    > A few days later, I sent myself a reminder for a medical appointment --
    > it never arrived.
    > Today, the same friend called and asked me if i got his email --- I didn't.
    >
    > I've been thinking about calling sbcglobal, but am not at all cheered by
    > the prospect of speaking to "Bob" in Bangalore.
    >
    > Is anyone else experiencing less than reliable service via their
    > sbcglobal.net addresses?
    >
    > Thanks . . .

    Might go online to web based email and check the spam folder, and
    make necessary corrections.

    --
    Old Gringo
    Just West Of Nowhere
    Enjoy Life And Live It To Its Fullest
    http://www.NuBoy-Industries.com
    OldGringo38, Aug 8, 2009
    #19
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\)

    Take MCSD.NET with VB.NET and C#.NET in the same time?

    Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\), Jan 1, 2004, in forum: MCSD
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    410
    The Fox
    Jan 1, 2004
  2. Jim
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    912
    nospam
    Jul 25, 2003
  3. Hyunki Chung

    POP service in SBCglobal.net

    Hyunki Chung, Sep 10, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    7,610
    Unknown
    Sep 10, 2003
  4. Patti

    Cannot send emails to sbcglobal and netzero

    Patti, Jan 27, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    801
    Mike Easter
    Jan 27, 2006
  5. london1919
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    2,842
    Lawrence Garvin \(MVP\)
    Dec 8, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page