Re: [Evolution] all of my archived emails dissapeared

[Ángel <angel 16bits net>]

On 2018-07-19 at 18:49 +0100, Richard Bown wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-07-19 at 12:32 -0500, Christopher Marlow wrote:
> > I would sort the mail lists by their addresses into
> > different folders so I would know what list i'm reading / talking
> > back to. 
> >
> > Folders like:
> > HAM_RADIO_LIST_A
> > HAM_RADIO_LIST_B
> >
> > then filter HamRadioListA HamRadio com then sort into
> > HAM_RADIO_LIST_A
> > folder.
> Hiya
>  But its not that simple when some can post to several mailing lists
> and some crosspost between lists.

This _shouldn't_ be a problem by itself.

> You cant filter on list as not all the lists are easily identified as
> such.

I would consider a bug in the list. However, you could still use a more
complex condition to filter it (check the recipient addresses, or even
the server that sent it).

I too, like keeping mails to different lists/groups on separated
folders. As each list should be sending you a copy, filtering on list
would move each one to its folder.

However, what breaks it are the case where the recipient list has been
"conveniently" unified, either by the mail provider (eg. Gmail) or a
list server shared by both lists (eg. Exchange).
There is a variant in the case that the mail server sees that you are
explicitly listed as a recipient and skips sending you the list email,
which is the mailman default, but that can be disabled by the user.

The problem in such case is that you have *one* email that needs to be
filed into *two* folders, because you should have received it *twice*,
but you didn't. ☹


> Filters are boolean , so you cant use "maybe"

How would that help? If a human secretary asked you "Where do I file
this bill?" and you reply with "Maybe on <a dozen of places>", so it
essentially ends up saved into a random one, how do you expect to find
it later?



> Perhaps one day we will have AI filters

That will mainly be a marketing label, not as useful as the name makes
it look like

> then you could filter on the perceived IQ of the poster, then you can filter on dumb, dumber and
> dumber :-), 

but this is actually a funny idea :)


Cheers