They're not here, Jim
-
Would that I could cancel the delivery of an email message and stop the spam...
-
@tsaukpaetra said in They're not here, Jim:
about 22 hours ago
Not that it'd be much help to tell you this now, but...
Great News! You Can Mute Gmail Threads
Your saving grace when someone overuses the "Reply All" function.
-
@anotherusername said in They're not here, Jim:
Not that it'd be much help to tell you this now, but...
Don't think that's going to be much use anyway - they aren't reply-to-all posts. They're bounce messages from other email servers.
I mark them as spam, personally.
-
@pjh it'd mute the entire conversation, which means that it wouldn't reappear in his inbox each time a new "this still can't be delivered, but have no fear, because we'll keep on trying (and spamming you) for XX more hours" message showed up.
-
@anotherusername said in They're not here, Jim:
@pjh it'd mute the entire conversation, which means that it wouldn't reappear in his inbox each time a new "this still can't be delivered, but have no fear, because we'll keep on trying (and spamming you) for XX more hours" message showed up.
That presupposes that all future messages are considered, by GMail, to be part of that conversation.
IME this isn't always the case.
-
@pjh I see no reason why they shouldn't be treated like part of the same conversation, since all of the 97 previous messages were.
Gmail tends to start new conversations when it's been a while since the last email was received, but I wouldn't expect it to do so for that.
-
@anotherusername said in They're not here, Jim:
@pjh I see no reason why they shouldn't be treated like part of the same conversation, since all of the 97 previous messages were.
Gmail tends to start new conversations when it's been a while since the last email was received, but I wouldn't expect it to do so for that.
Must be just me then.
-
@pjh Those are a different type of bounce from what he was getting.
-
@pjh his were "The recipient server did not accept our requests to connect". I.e., gmail tried to find the recipient server but it could not be reached for comment. In this situation, it keeps retrying delivery of the same message, until either it successfully connects to the recipient server or gives up trying, whichever comes first, so it makes sense that the string of failure messages are placed into a single conversation.
The ones in your screenshot were delivery failures. I.e., the recipient server was reached, and when Gmail attempted to deliver the message to it, the recipient server told it to fuck off. The server will not reattempt message delivery after this, so it wouldn't make sense for multiple delivery failure messages to be "conversized" - each delivery failure message has to pertain to a different outgoing email.
-
TRWTF is that GMail doesn't have any better interface for reporting failure than generating an email.
-
@pjh said in They're not here, Jim:
They're bounce messages from
otherGApps (the email service we're using) email servers.FTFY. Because the gmail couldn't connect, it's not a message from other servers.
-
@anonymous234 said in They're not here, Jim:
TRWTF is that GMail doesn't have any better interface for reporting failure than generating an email.
Not GMail's fault for using an ancient not-forward-thinking communications protocol...
-
@tsaukpaetra But this is a local error. It's not coming from another server via SMTP.
-
@anonymous234 said in They're not here, Jim:
@tsaukpaetra But this is a local error. It's not coming from another server via SMTP.
No, it is an error detected at the server and one being presented at the client ....
-
@thecpuwizard said in They're not here, Jim:
@anonymous234 said in They're not here, Jim:
@tsaukpaetra But this is a local error. It's not coming from another server via SMTP.
No, it is an error detected at the server and one being presented at the client ....
client displayed server data from a server that failed to serve data to another server....
