OE Is Deleting My NG Headers

Why on earth did you decide to crosspost, sorry, I meant simulpost this?
--
~Bruce


"D. Spencer Hines" wrote in message
...
"Neil" wrote in message
...

So Microsoft is right to FORCE me to keep Outlook Express Lean & Mean and
not give me a choice? They're right to force me to have to move every
message I want to save into new folders or have them be deleted against
my
will? They're right to delete things from my hard drive even when I tell
them not to?...

Gonna start looking into other newsgroup readers.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

This rampant, peripatetic, poltroonish pogue should have done that long
ago...

Forte Agent is a much more powerful newsreader than Outlook Express has
ever
pretended to be.

He should look at it posthaste, without letting the swinging saloon doors
of
this newsgroup clip him in the tuchis on his way out.

But instead of doing that he prefers to lob hand grenades at Microsoft on
matters wherein they have NOT ERRED, rather on matters where they HAVE
erred..

Said pogue thereby exhibits traits of very poor judgment, righteous
conviction and unrelenting ZEAL -- the very worst possible traits, joined
in
pernicious and flatulent combination.

He is too thick to understand that Outlook Express was designed to
particular requirements existing at the time and place in the space-time
continuum when it was conceived and designed by Software Geniuses Of Their
Day [SOGOTD].

"Neil" obviously doesn't have a noodle capable of understanding the
architecture of Outlook Express and its capabilities and limitations --
driven in large part by hardware constraints and cost-benefit analyses
extant at the time of its conception and development.

He clearly is a boy, in temperament, character and maturity, even if not
in
age -- and is probably a pimply-face teenager -- high on too much Ritalin,
paint fumes and cleaning fluid.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of
in your philosophy." ---- William Shakespeare [1564-1616] The Tragedy of
Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, Act I, Scene V, Line 166-167

Matthew 7:6
--
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Vires et Honor
Deus Vult

snipped
But as a newsgroup user, I'd like to be able to have messages that I've
already stored on my harddrive remain on my harddrive, rather than having
them deleted against my will by the software. If bloat is a problem, then
let ME manage it. Don't force me to have my messages deleted simply
because you're connecting to the server, for crying out loud.

You and a few others are trying to justify Microsoft's action, like as
though it makes sense. It doesn't make sense to delete messages without
user authorization. It's just a stupid thing that OE does.


OE is doing what a newsreader is supposed to do, keep the messages on your
computer synched with the newsgroup server.
I don't know of any newsreaders that do not sync with the server.
You have not mentioned what news server that you are using.
The Microsoft server has a 90 day retention period.
--
Ronald Sommer

Neil wrote:

"VanguardLH" wrote in message
...
PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

Devil's Advocate: If posts were not removed from OE (in its current
design
state) when they were removed from the server and a heavy newsgroup user
never deleted any posts manually, consider how bloated and ripe for
corruption the message store would become over time!

How true. There is still the 2GB maximum file size for the .dbx files
used by OE. That means you cannot store more than 2GB worth of headers
and bodies in a .dbx file for a newsgroup. Exceeding that threshold
results in a corrupted .dbx file. So with NNTP servers with extreme
retention intervals and with a user that downloads all headers and also
all their bodies then it becomes more likely the 2GB threshold gets
exceeded.

So you're saying that the software isn't intelligent enough to just say:
"Hey, you've reached the limit. Can't download anymore. Would you like me to
clear some messages for you"? Instead it has to automatically delete
messages, just to avoid the 2 GB limit??? Ridiculous!

For what it's worth, all of my newsgroup DBXs are less than 10 MB! Not even
anywhere close to 2 GB!!!!!

And, again, if it ever did come close, a simple message prompting to delete
old messages would be fine (similar to what Windows does when your hard
drive gets near capacity).

There is no "high water" alert for when you approach or exceed the size
of the .dbx file. After all, just one post download that includes a
huge file could enlarge your 10MB .dbx file to past the 2GB boundary. I
wouldn't doubt that there are some huge files in the binary newsgroups,
like for videos (e.g., movies). Even if they are split up into multiple
posts and you use OE's Combine and Decode, one post sliced up into
several posts to recompile the file could chew up a lot of disk space in
a big hurry.

OE is a dead product. Has been since 2002. Don't expect any functional
changes to an unsupported product. Won't happen. No point in beating a
dead horse. Either continue using OE if it works for you or switch to
something else. However, that won't solve your "syncrhonization"
complaint regarding the NNTP server expiring articles (removing them)
and your newsreader staying in sync with what articles have been
removed.

I can't speak positively for all newsreaders but the half dozen, or
more, that I've trialed all do this. You need move the posts into your
own separate store. In OE, that's just another folder separate of the
one under the news server folder tree. You will need to download the
bodies for all those archived posts as obviously if you just download
headers because it won't be on the server when you later want to read
the post. That means a LOT more downloading; i.e., you will have to
download the bodies for all posts in all the subscribed newsgroups
rather than just those that you choose to read as you peruse the
newsgroups. This will fill up the .dbx files a lot faster.

If you switch to Windows Live Mail, you might ask in those newsgroups if
there is a limit. WLM doesn't use a single .dbx file to hold the
contents of posts in a newsgroup (one .dbx file per newsgroup). Instead
WLM scatters folders under your %userprofile% for each newsgroup and
each e-mail or post is a separate file. So WLM is saving the items in
the file system rather than in a file. There is an index file to keep
track of what item is in what folder object within WLM. I don't know if
there are problems with indexing or total item counts in the index file.
I personally do not like WLM creating all the folders and files on my
drive. You can ask in the following group if there are any size
maximums per newgroup or per news server:

microsoft.public.windows.live.mail.desktop

Even if the message store was dynamically expanded so it could be an
infinite size (up to consuming all the free space on your drives), more
items to hold and index means a slower performing newsreader. You need
to trim down your stored posts, especially for those with bodies, to
keep your newsreader responsive. Would you want to wait many minutes,
or perhaps much longer for a huge archive, to access a newsgroup? You
see a lot of users trying to emulate Google Groups to archive all those
old posts?

"Neil" wrote in message ...

Again, I have my synchronization settings set to "No synchronization."


If you never use a synchronize command the synchronization settings
are meaningless to you.


And I remember my headers used to stay indefinitely.


That has nothing to do with a synchronization command.
It depends on what the NNTP server is telling OE in its headers.
If you had headers staying indefinitely it just means that the
server wasn't changing the start number in its 211 replies
to a group command.


....
So what's the point of having a synchronization setting of "no
synchronization" if OE is going to synchronize anyway?


Don't confuse two different results with two different actions. ; )


Doesn't make sense.


It does make sense. Apart from differences only available by using
a synchronize command the main thing that you need to be aware of
is the Get 300 headers... option and the fact that its value is used to do
an automatic Get Next 300... every time you enter a newsgroup when you
are in a Working Online state. If you don't want that to happen,
either don't enter that newsgroup or enter it with Work Offline set.
If you don't have the Get next 300... option checked the automatic
Get next done for you has the equivalent effect of a Synchronize
Newsgroup command done while the Synchronize settings are
Headers Only.


And, like I said, didn't used to be that way. I remember a point where OE
would keep downloaded headers indefinitely.


Was this with a different NNTP server? In any case servers change
how they act over time and they may also be set up to serve different
newsgroups differently.



Also, what's the point of having a "Delete news messages X days after being
downloaded" if OE is just going to delete them anyway, regardless of the
setting. Again, doesn't make sense.


Makes perfect sense if someone only wants to keep a weeks worth
of posts in his cache instead of a much larger number that the server
might support.


HTH

Robert Aldwinckle
---

Neil wrote:

"VanguardLH" wrote in message
...
Neil wrote:

"VanguardLH" wrote in message
...
Bruce Hagen wrote:

News servers only keep posts for a period of time. Each server is
different.
MSNews keeps them for 90 days. Some servers keep them longer, some only
for
a few days.

If you want to keep posts indefinitely, copy them to an OE local
folder.

Also, make sure that in View | Current View, you have Show All Messages
and
Group messages By Conversation checked and nothing else.

The reason regarding Bruce's reply is that OE remains in sync with the
NNTP server. If the NNTP server expires and drops a post then so, too,
will OE. You need to move items out of the newsgroups folder in OE if
you don't want them to get synchronized (i.e., deleted in OE after the
NNTP server deleted them).

Again, I have my synchronization settings set to "No synchronization."
And I
remember my headers used to stay indefinitely. Once a header was
downloaded,
it would just stay in the folder. If I hadn't gotten the body of a
message,
and it scrolled off the server, then, yeah, it was too late (and when I
tried to get that expired text, OE would show the header in strikethrough
text; but the header would still be there).

So what's the point of having a synchronization setting of "no
synchronization" if OE is going to synchronize anyway? Doesn't make
sense.
And, like I said, didn't used to be that way. I remember a point where OE
would keep downloaded headers indefinitely.

Also, what's the point of having a "Delete news messages X days after
being
downloaded" if OE is just going to delete them anyway, regardless of the
setting. Again, doesn't make sense.

The "synchronization" you mention only relates to reading posts while OE
is offline. It determines if OE is going to retrieve nothing new, just
headers for new posts, or the headers and bodies of new posts. You can
then put OE offline to read them (or read them while you are
disconnected from the network). That is NOT the synchronization that I
spoke of which is OE keeping in sync with what posts are currently
available on the server.

If OE gets out of sync, you will see articles listed in OE but when you
try to read them you get "message no longer available on server" error.
That is because the server expired the article and removed it.

Yes, I understand that. I've gotten that many times. No problem. I don't
expect to be able to get messages that are no longer available.

What I'm saying is: AFTER a message body is ALREADY downloaded, it shouldn't
be deleted from my hard drive without my permission.

There is
an overview headers database that gets updated at intervals, like maybe
just once per day, but the article expire during the day. That means
the overview database and the article database can get out of sync. You
end up with "bad article number" errors when your newsreader tries
retrieve an article that was found in the overview database (when you
retrieved just headers) but the article no longer exists in the article
database. When the overview database gets updated then it is in sync
with the article database. That's another type of synchronization
problem. When an article is removed from the server, and after the
overview database gets updated to get in sync with the articles, then OE
uses the overview headers to figure out when an article is no longer
available on the server, and then OE syncs itself. That's the sync that
I was talking about.

All I know is that I used to download headers, and headers would stay in the
newsgroup folder. I would download message bodies, and they would stay in
the folder as well. (Or, more precisely, in the DBX.) There was never a
problem with messages that were already downloaded. OE was able to just keep
them on the hard drive, and add to them as new messages became available.

Then there came a point where OE changed and started deleting old messages
and headers. But it didn't used to do that.

So whatever your reason is that OE has to delete old messages and headers, I
say: no it doesn't. It used to not do that, and there's no reason to do it.


The sync you were talking about has nothing to do with staying in sync
with the server. It has to do with reading articles while offline.
"Synchronization" covers many different types of synchronization. Maybe
"cache headers or articles or both for offline reading" would have been
a better description albeit much longer description for the
"Synchronization" option in OE. Many users had or still have to pay by
the minute of connect time on a dial-up connection. They don't want to
waste time wandering around dozens of newsgroups hunting down the
articles they want to read and then retrieving them and then disconnect
to reduce their cost (which is the minutes deducted from their monthly
quota). Instead then have OE retrieve all headers and bodies for all
posts in all the newsgroups they visit (or maybe use rules to find just
particular posts). It often takes less time to do that so less minutes
are deducted from the user's connect time quota.

Regardless of your "synchronization" settings in OE (which have to do
with retrieving the headers and bodies so they are available even when
offline), OE will synchronize what articles it keeps with those that are
still available on the server whenever you connect OE to the server.

And that's what I'm saying is wrong. And OE used to not do that. And it was
fine.

If something is downloaded to my hard drive, it should stay there.

So
despite you caching a local copy to read off- or online, it will
disappear from OE if it disappears from the server. That's why you need
to move the articles to a different "holding" folder that is not the
newsgroups folder that syncs with the server. You break the sync link
so the article remains in that holding folder.

Again, I shouldn't have to do that. And OE didn't previously require that.
It's a ridiculous thing.

Gonna start looking into other newsgroup readers.

You keep ignoring what others have mentioned. How long OE retains an
article in its local database depends on how long the news server keeps
that same article. While I haven't mentioned it by name but rather
described the expiry process on the server, others have named it:
retention period. If your newsgroups provider reduced their retention
period then old articles disappear from the server and also disappear
from OE to stay in sync with the server.

Contact your newsgroups provider to ask if they reduced their retention
interval. It is also possible they rebuilt their article database (and
the accompanying overview database). That could result in changing the
article numbers of the posts that were on that NNTP server. When the
newsgroups provider does this, you have to reset the newsgroup (i.e.,
clear out all the old locally cached copies of the posts) and revisit
the newsgroup to redownload all those posts. I use the Motzarella free
NNTP server. A couple weeks back, they lost a hard disk and had to
rebuild their article and overview databases (by peering with the other
NNTP servers). This took over a day to complete. After that rebuild,
every Motzarella user had to reset their newsgroup to wipe out all the
old locally cached records and re-retrieve them all over again. Before
that rebuild completed, lots of users complained that newsgroups were
empty, some had a severely reduced number of posts, or they would get
"bad article number" when trying to retrieve a post's body for which
they previously only downloaded its header. No matter what newsreader
the user used, they all had to do the reset.

So you might have to reset the newsgroups and rebuild your local copies
of the posts. Right-click on a newsgroup folder, Properties, and reset
the folder. Then revisit the folder to retrieve all those posts again.

VanguardLH

This and an earlier post clearly reflect your personal experience. You
are pointing out some pretty basic and fundamental elements of using
Outlook Express as a news reader. Although I read Offline nearly all
ring bells with me. I wonder why? Neil needs to reflect on this as it
demonstates how we have learned how to make Outlook Express work for us
notwithstanding it's flaws.

I archive news posts. I do this every 14 days. Where I actively post I
try to keep a month's messages in my current folder. This means I can
quickly spot any response to one of my posts and reply. The number of
posts per month to these newsgroups is less than 50% ( perhaps more )
than it was a few years ago. Measures to handle this volume were devised
by me and others based on our individual experiences and they work.

The regular archiving of news posts has a noticeable impact on the time
it takes to load a newsgroup into memory. You can encounter the
phenomenon of being able to drink a cup of coffee whilst you wait for
the newsgroup to complete loading if you don't archive or trim the
newsgroup size.

I dual boot Windows XP with Vista. I prefer Windows XP plus Outlook
Express to Vista and Windows Mail. I have not tried Windows Live Mail. I
suspect I would not like it.

You make a point about Windows Live Mail distributing files across the
drive. This point also applies to Outlook Express; certainly if you
download bodies. In the past, with smaller hard drives, I have placed
the Outlook Express store folder in a dedicated partition to counter
rapid fragmentation across the system. It poses less of a problem with
larger drives and more generous amounts of free disk space. In my view
it is the volume of turnover that creates the problem rather than the
file structure. However, someone in this conversation commented on the
impact of cluster size. Using NTFS I agree that Outlook Express would
use less disk space so this would have an affect on the speed of
fragmentation of free disk space.


--



Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
VanguardLH wrote:
Neil wrote:

"VanguardLH" wrote in message
...
PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote:

Devil's Advocate: If posts were not removed from OE (in its current
design
state) when they were removed from the server and a heavy
newsgroup user never deleted any posts manually, consider how
bloated and ripe for corruption the message store would become
over time!

How true. There is still the 2GB maximum file size for the .dbx
files used by OE. That means you cannot store more than 2GB worth
of headers and bodies in a .dbx file for a newsgroup. Exceeding
that threshold results in a corrupted .dbx file. So with NNTP
servers with extreme retention intervals and with a user that
downloads all headers and also all their bodies then it becomes
more likely the 2GB threshold gets exceeded.

So you're saying that the software isn't intelligent enough to just
say: "Hey, you've reached the limit. Can't download anymore. Would
you like me to clear some messages for you"? Instead it has to
automatically delete messages, just to avoid the 2 GB limit???
Ridiculous!

For what it's worth, all of my newsgroup DBXs are less than 10 MB!
Not even anywhere close to 2 GB!!!!!

And, again, if it ever did come close, a simple message prompting to
delete old messages would be fine (similar to what Windows does when
your hard drive gets near capacity).

There is no "high water" alert for when you approach or exceed the
size of the .dbx file. After all, just one post download that
includes a huge file could enlarge your 10MB .dbx file to past the
2GB boundary. I wouldn't doubt that there are some huge files in the
binary newsgroups, like for videos (e.g., movies). Even if they are
split up into multiple posts and you use OE's Combine and Decode, one
post sliced up into several posts to recompile the file could chew up
a lot of disk space in a big hurry.

OE is a dead product. Has been since 2002. Don't expect any
functional changes to an unsupported product. Won't happen. No
point in beating a dead horse. Either continue using OE if it works
for you or switch to something else. However, that won't solve your
"syncrhonization" complaint regarding the NNTP server expiring
articles (removing them) and your newsreader staying in sync with
what articles have been removed.

I can't speak positively for all newsreaders but the half dozen, or
more, that I've trialed all do this. You need move the posts into
your own separate store. In OE, that's just another folder separate
of the one under the news server folder tree. You will need to
download the bodies for all those archived posts as obviously if you
just download headers because it won't be on the server when you
later want to read the post. That means a LOT more downloading;
i.e., you will have to download the bodies for all posts in all the
subscribed newsgroups rather than just those that you choose to read
as you peruse the newsgroups. This will fill up the .dbx files a lot
faster.

If you switch to Windows Live Mail, you might ask in those newsgroups
if there is a limit. WLM doesn't use a single .dbx file to hold the
contents of posts in a newsgroup (one .dbx file per newsgroup).
Instead WLM scatters folders under your %userprofile% for each
newsgroup and each e-mail or post is a separate file. So WLM is
saving the items in the file system rather than in a file. There is
an index file to keep track of what item is in what folder object
within WLM. I don't know if there are problems with indexing or
total item counts in the index file. I personally do not like WLM
creating all the folders and files on my drive. You can ask in the
following group if there are any size maximums per newgroup or per
news server:

microsoft.public.windows.live.mail.desktop

Even if the message store was dynamically expanded so it could be an
infinite size (up to consuming all the free space on your drives),
more items to hold and index means a slower performing newsreader.
You need to trim down your stored posts, especially for those with
bodies, to keep your newsreader responsive. Would you want to wait
many minutes, or perhaps much longer for a huge archive, to access a
newsgroup? You see a lot of users trying to emulate Google Groups to
archive all those old posts?

Robert

Also, what's the point of having a "Delete news messages X days
after being downloaded" if OE is just going to delete them anyway,
regardless of the setting. Again, doesn't make sense.


Makes perfect sense if someone only wants to keep a weeks worth
of posts in his cache instead of a much larger number that the server
might support.

Your comment is correct . It was logical. It was also part of one of the
most disastrous and problematic features of Outlook Express. Compacting.
Checking this feature was blamed for countless losses of messages.
Automatic compacting was abandoned by users in favour of manual
compacting Offline. The changes made to automatic compacting not so long
ago improved the situation but did not totally resolve the problem.
Manual compacting before automatic compacting is triggered remains the
safest option. The option to "Delete news messages X days after being
downloaded" should have been removed when the other changes were made.


--


Regards.

Gerry
~~~~
FCA
Stourport, England
Enquire, plan and execute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Robert Aldwinckle wrote:
"Neil" wrote in message
...
Again, I have my synchronization settings set to "No
synchronization."


If you never use a synchronize command the synchronization settings
are meaningless to you.


And I remember my headers used to stay indefinitely.


That has nothing to do with a synchronization command.
It depends on what the NNTP server is telling OE in its headers.
If you had headers staying indefinitely it just means that the
server wasn't changing the start number in its 211 replies
to a group command.


...
So what's the point of having a synchronization setting of "no
synchronization" if OE is going to synchronize anyway?


Don't confuse two different results with two different actions. ; )


Doesn't make sense.


It does make sense. Apart from differences only available by using
a synchronize command the main thing that you need to be aware of
is the Get 300 headers... option and the fact that its value is used
to do an automatic Get Next 300... every time you enter a newsgroup
when
you are in a Working Online state. If you don't want that to
happen,
either don't enter that newsgroup or enter it with Work Offline set.
If you don't have the Get next 300... option checked the automatic
Get next done for you has the equivalent effect of a Synchronize
Newsgroup command done while the Synchronize settings are
Headers Only.


And, like I said, didn't used to be that way. I remember a point
where OE would keep downloaded headers indefinitely.


Was this with a different NNTP server? In any case servers change
how they act over time and they may also be set up to serve different
newsgroups differently.



Also, what's the point of having a "Delete news messages X days
after being downloaded" if OE is just going to delete them anyway,
regardless of the setting. Again, doesn't make sense.


Makes perfect sense if someone only wants to keep a weeks worth
of posts in his cache instead of a much larger number that the server
might support.


HTH

Robert Aldwinckle
---

It would be refreshing to see Google come out with an OS. MS needs the
competition. Otherwise it will keep releasing crap like WLM and dumping on
the users.

steve

"Neil" wrote in message
...

"NormanM" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:09:56 -0600, Neil wrote:

"Steve Cochran" wrote in message
...

It never made sense and its been a problem since OE4. It won't be
fixed,
so if you wish to keep NG messages, you have to copy them to local
folders. That is the only way. People complained about this for many
years and MS just ignored them.

And MS wonders why they're sinking faster than the titanic while Google
acquires their empire (apologies for the mixed metaphor; but maybe in
this
case a mixed metaphor is fitting, given the absolutely absurd state of
the
software).

Very mixed up. Google does not publish software. Microsoft is only losing
on
the web search front.

Really? What year are you living in? Google has Google Docs to compete
with Word, Google Spreadsheet to compete with Excel, Google Calendar to
compete with Outlook, and Gmail to compete with Outlook, and they are
providing functionality to use all of those OFFLINE. Furthermore, Google
came out with their own browser, Chrome, which not only competes with
Internet Explorer, but is designed from the ground up specifically for
running web apps (i.e., once it matures it will probably be a full-fledged
operating system, replacing Windows, just as Windows once supplemented but
then eventually replaced DOS).

All of these are in their infancy, and their maturity is many years away.
But Microsoft sees the writing on the wall. It's not about Internet
search; it's about a paradigm shift away from desktop apps to web-based
apps. And Google is far ahead of Microsoft in the battle.

The year is 2009. Keep up with what's going on.

MS (1998-2006): "There is no problem with the OE message store."

There was no recognition that OE was not scaleable. That is not a reason
for the "current state".

steve

"PA Bear [MS MVP]" wrote in message
...
Devil's Advocate: If posts were not removed from OE (in its current design
state) when they were removed from the server and a heavy newsgroup user
never deleted any posts manually, consider how bloated and ripe for
corruption the message store would become over time!
--
~PAÞ

Steve Cochran wrote:
It never made sense and its been a problem since OE4. It won't be fixed,
so
if you wish to keep NG messages, you have to copy them to local folders.
That is the only way. People complained about this for many years and MS
just ignored them.

steve

"Neil" wrote in message
...

"VanguardLH" wrote in message
...
Bruce Hagen wrote:

News servers only keep posts for a period of time. Each server is
different.
MSNews keeps them for 90 days. Some servers keep them longer, some
only
for
a few days.

If you want to keep posts indefinitely, copy them to an OE local
folder.

Also, make sure that in View | Current View, you have Show All
Messages
and
Group messages By Conversation checked and nothing else.

The reason regarding Bruce's reply is that OE remains in sync with the
NNTP server. If the NNTP server expires and drops a post then so, too,
will OE. You need to move items out of the newsgroups folder in OE if
you don't want them to get synchronized (i.e., deleted in OE after the
NNTP server deleted them).

Again, I have my synchronization settings set to "No synchronization."
And
I remember my headers used to stay indefinitely. Once a header was
downloaded, it would just stay in the folder. If I hadn't gotten the
body
of a message, and it scrolled off the server, then, yeah, it was too
late
(and when I tried to get that expired text, OE would show the header in
strikethrough text; but the header would still be there).

So what's the point of having a synchronization setting of "no
synchronization" if OE is going to synchronize anyway? Doesn't make
sense.
And, like I said, didn't used to be that way. I remember a point where
OE
would keep downloaded headers indefinitely.

Also, what's the point of having a "Delete news messages X days after
being downloaded" if OE is just going to delete them anyway, regardless
of
the setting. Again, doesn't make sense.

You are just feeding the troll.

steve

"Neil" wrote in message
...
These resistant pogues couldn't get their noodles around that one

Keep OE = Outlook EXPRESS.

Don't Bloat It.


This "pogue" believes he's intelligent enough to be able to manage his own
software without being forced to lose messages every time they scroll off
the server. Face it: this is a glitch, a flaw. You're trying to justify it
with some nonsense about keeping OE lean and mean; but the bottom line is
that it doesn't make any sense to delete messages against the user's will.

Imagine if OE did that on the mail side. Why not keep that "lean and mean"
as well?

Obviously your argument is ridiculous.