Possible bug in Message Rules?

[BudV]

An MVP suggested a clever simple rule which detects a lot of cases of
multiple recipients: Look for all letters that are NOT in the recipient's
address and act accordingly. It works fine in Outlook Express, but not in
Outlook.

To test it, I created a message in folder Test1 which has the recipient
(e-mail address removed). I use the rule that checks for specific words in the
recipient's address, a word list of the individual bytes in the string
"bcfgkpquvxyz0123456789", each byte specified independently in quotes, and
the action to copy the message to folder Test2. The byte string represents
all characters (and digits) that are not in (e-mail address removed).

When I "run the rules now" using folder Test1, the message gets copied -- it
shouldn't.

I worked with other rules: looking for the letter "i"; looking for "att";
looking for "atx", etc. They all behaved appropriately.

Where's the bug -- in Outlook or in my head?

 

[BudV]

Sorry, I forgot. I'm working with Outlook 2003 under WinXP Home SP2.

 

[Diane Poremsky [MVP]]

exactly how does the rule read? are you attempting to do an AND or an OR
condition?

--
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours
Coauthor, OneNote 2003 for Windows (Visual QuickStart Guide)
Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/



Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter:
(e-mail address removed)

 

[BudV]

"Apply this rule after the message arrives
with 'b' or 'c' or 'f' or ... or '8' or '9' or '0'
and on this machine only
move a copy to the Test2 folder.

("this machine only" spec was accidental)
I'm a long-time programmer. I wouldn't be caught dead making that mistake.

exactly how does the rule read? are you attempting to do an AND or an OR
condition?

--
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours
Coauthor, OneNote 2003 for Windows (Visual QuickStart Guide)
Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/



Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter:
(e-mail address removed)

An MVP suggested a clever simple rule which detects a lot of cases of
multiple recipients: Look for all letters that are NOT in the
recipient's address and act accordingly. It works fine in Outlook
Express, but not in Outlook.

To test it, I created a message in folder Test1 which has the recipient
(e-mail address removed). I use the rule that checks for specific words in the
recipient's address, a word list of the individual bytes in the string
"bcfgkpquvxyz0123456789", each byte specified independently in quotes,
and the action to copy the message to folder Test2. The byte string
represents all characters (and digits) that are not in
(e-mail address removed).

When I "run the rules now" using folder Test1, the message gets copied --
it shouldn't.

I worked with other rules: looking for the letter "i"; looking for "att";
looking for "atx", etc. They all behaved appropriately.

Where's the bug -- in Outlook or in my head?

 

[BudV]

I'm also finding that "on this machine only" is not accidental. The system
is volunteering it even though I carefully avoided marking its checkbox.

"Apply this rule after the message arrives
with 'b' or 'c' or 'f' or ... or '8' or '9' or '0'
and on this machine only
move a copy to the Test2 folder.

("this machine only" spec was accidental)
I'm a long-time programmer. I wouldn't be caught dead making that
mistake.

exactly how does the rule read? are you attempting to do an AND or an OR
condition?

--
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours
Coauthor, OneNote 2003 for Windows (Visual QuickStart Guide)
Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/



Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter:
(e-mail address removed)

An MVP suggested a clever simple rule which detects a lot of cases of
multiple recipients: Look for all letters that are NOT in the
recipient's address and act accordingly. It works fine in Outlook
Express, but not in Outlook.

To test it, I created a message in folder Test1 which has the recipient
(e-mail address removed). I use the rule that checks for specific words in the
recipient's address, a word list of the individual bytes in the string
"bcfgkpquvxyz0123456789", each byte specified independently in quotes,
and the action to copy the message to folder Test2. The byte string
represents all characters (and digits) that are not in
(e-mail address removed).

When I "run the rules now" using folder Test1, the message gets
copied -- it shouldn't.

I worked with other rules: looking for the letter "i"; looking for
"att"; looking for "atx", etc. They all behaved appropriately.

Where's the bug -- in Outlook or in my head?

 

[Brian Tillman]

I'm also finding that "on this machine only" is not accidental. The
system is volunteering it even though I carefully avoided marking its
checkbox.

Is your Test2 folder on a PST or on an Exchange server? If the former, I
would expect you to see "on this machine only".

 

[BudV]

PST, thanks.

I don't want to derail onto this thought. I'm primarily concerned about the
apparent bug.

 

[BudV]

Now what happens?

If I'm right about this and there is a bug in Outlook, can I assume that an
MVP has forwarded it to the appropriate department for investigation and
correction, or is there something I should do along this line?

 

[BudV]

So this is what programmer's hell is like!

I started this thread on behalf of my daughter, who uses both Outlook(OL)
and Outlook Express(OE), both with the latest updates. I set up the message
rules for her OE and they worked very well, so I set up similar message
rules for her OL, and they did not. I found that a check for "p" or "s" in
the To: line resulted in a True, when neither of those letters was actually
there. The check for other letters that weren't supposed to be in the To:
line behaved properly.

So I installed OL on my PC (same operating system environment, latest
updates to OL) and did some testing. Sure enough, the same invalid results
occurred -- until today. I was doing some extensive testing, just to make
sure about things before I wrote MS. About 60 minutes into the session, the
"p" and "s" failures STOPPED OCCURRING!

This blew my mind. I took the "p" and "s" checks out of my daughter's rules
and, with my apologies, told her I was through with this venture.

I sincerely hope that some curious MVP will check into this and let me know
the results.