So today, all of my missing messages suddenly were downloaded into Outlook
along with new ones. And nothing was "working as it should" earlier. Some
messages were skipped over for no apparent reason. How is that "working as it
should"? My point was that messages that didn't get downloaded into Outlook
the first time might have had something wrong with them that kept them from
being downloaded. But that hypothesis was disproved when they were downloaded
into Outlook Express--if there were something wrong with the messages, they
presumably wouldn't have been downloaded into another mail program.
The point you seem not to understand is that if the missing messages never
downloaded into Outlook, they were still AVAILABLE to be downloaded into
Outlook, which happened today. I knew that messages that had already been
downloaded wouldn't be downloaded again. If they had been downloaded in the
first place, I wouldn't have made the original post. By the way, I didn't get
a chance to run scanpst on my pst file, and Avast's e-mail scanner restarted
when I started the computer this morning. So there was no apparent change
between the days when the missing messages wouldn't download and today.
Whatever change there was that allowed them to be downloaded today was
neither caused by nor revealed to me.
more...
Roady said:
None of your remarks are relevant to troubleshooting this and only indicates
it works as it should.
In Outlook Express, not in Outlook. If you were to recreate you mail profile
of Outlook, you'd also download all messages on the server again as your
downloaded messages history would be reset.
Sure, because it is now in the Inbox folder under a new ID which hasn't been
downloaded yet so it will download now.
No, there is no logic in your arguments which supports that. All on-line
items which you want to download again need to get a new ID which is higher
than the last ID which you downloaded.
Your keyword is "again." The messages didn't download the first time.
Which is expected if you understand the logic behind the POP3 protocol.
That's why I asked if you were saying this based on old items or new.
Could you give a clear example of a rule that doesn't work? If possible
provide an example of a message as well that should be caught by rules but
in fact is not. My guess is, that either the rule is corrupt or other rules
apply to the message as well which reverses the effect of another. This is
often the case when people create many rules. Make sure you sort your rules
accordingly and add the condition "and stop processing rules" accordingly.
I have three problems with Outlook's rules. One is that when setting up
rules using the non-advanced method, Outlook shows the display name rather
than the e-mail address. So if I set a rule for Outlook to move mail from a
particular person to a particular folder, if mail from that person's name
comes with the same display name but a different address, the message doesn't
get moved. I therefore think Microsoft should have Outllook show the address
rather than the display name so as not to throw people off. So the next step
is to use the advanced options and enter the message text into the Specified
Text In The Message Header field. That leads me to my two other problems with
Outlook rules--sometimes those rules work and somethimes they don't. And
Outllok Help apparently does not provide the exact definition of a message
header. I had to learn how to use the message header option from posting to
this newsgroup. I tried to use "Specific words in the Sender's address," but
that didn't work too well either. You're probably the one who told me how to
use the message header. The Help says simply to follow the directions in the
Rules wizard, which doesn't provide enough instructions. I know it is the
attitude of many MVPs that one needs to spend time learning how to use the
program. But that is no excuse for over-complicating something simple. Why,
for example, can't Outlook have what many Web-based filters have: the
capability to specify text in the From line. No one who knows how to create a
rule in the first place needs to look up the definition of the From line.
I could sometimes have more than one rule operating on a single message, but
I created subsequent rules only after the original rule didn't work or
because it didn't work, I forgot that I had made it. And all rules applying
to any given message are to move the message into the same folder. I've even
created rules by right-clicking a message and then tried to apply the rule to
all messages in my Inbox but the messages weren't moved.
Many of my rules are gone now, because a few weeks ago, many of my rules
suddenly lost their configuration settings. I was checking my mail and got a
message that said "One or more of your rules are in error." I went to Rules
and Alerts and discovered that most of them had no destination folder set.
This is the second time that happened. I didn't recognize all the senders'
names, so for those, I simply deleted the rules altogether. For the others, I
reentered the destination folders.
Finally, you said I should sort my rules. How do I do that? There appears to
be nothing in Outlook 2007 Help that tells how to sort rules. And incomplete
help files are the worst part of a vast number of applications.
