Test Email

[Dave Crozier]

Guys,
Please ignore this test... just seeing if our migration to Office 365 has worked correctly..

Thanks
Dave


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/***@MM1P123MB0953.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Ted Roche]

Post by Dave Crozier
Guys,
Please ignore this test... just seeing if our migration to Office 365 has worked correctly..
Thanks
Dave

I'm pretty sure I ignored this a couple of days ago. How many times
should we ignore it <g>?
--
Ted Roche
Ted Roche & Associates, LLC
http://www.tedroche.com

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CACW6n4twLNi_erbA54fivEjguwMJ8JFKh=***@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Dave Crozier]

No need Ted, All working as it should now.... this particular message must have been stuck in Ed's "let's look at this.." queue as I think it was sent HTML formatted as opposed to plain text, hence why I sent it again.

Dave Crozier
Software Development Manager
Flexipol Packaging Ltd.

-----Original Message-----
From: ProFox <profox-***@leafe.com> On Behalf Of Ted Roche
Sent: 03 August 2018 15:24
To: ***@leafe.com
Subject: Re: Test Email

Post by Dave Crozier
Guys,
Please ignore this test... just seeing if our migration to Office 365 has worked correctly..
Thanks
Dave

I'm pretty sure I ignored this a couple of days ago. How many times should we ignore it <g>?

--
Ted Roche
Ted Roche & Associates, LLC
http://www.tedroche.com

[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/***@MM1P123MB0953.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Ed Leafe]

Post by Dave Crozier
No need Ted, All working as it should now.... this particular message must have been stuck in Ed's "let's look at this.." queue as I think it was sent HTML formatted as opposed to plain text, hence why I sent it again.

It was held because apparently you were not a subscriber for a period, and posts from non-subscribers are held until I get around to reviewing them.


-- Ed Leafe






_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/9270D03B-30D2-47F9-BCC7-***@leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Paul H. Tarver]

So, Dave's Office365 test for text & html submissions is working perfectly!

And, Ed's unscheduled test for the hold procedure for non-subscribers is
working perfectly!

ALL TESTS SUCCESSFUL! ALL SYSTEMS GO!

Ted will be running the performance analysis on Ed & Dave's work this
afternoon and then we can jump straight to production!

WOOHOO! :)

PS: it's Friday. Can you tell?

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-***@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Ed Leafe
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2018 10:20 AM
To: ***@leafe.com
Subject: Re: Test Email

Post by Dave Crozier
No need Ted, All working as it should now.... this particular message must

have been stuck in Ed's "let's look at this.." queue as I think it was sent
HTML formatted as opposed to plain text, hence why I sent it again.

It was held because apparently you were not a subscriber for a period, and
posts from non-subscribers are held until I get around to reviewing them.


-- Ed Leafe






[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/009f01d42b45$0a740360$1f5c0a20$@tpcqpc.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Ted Roche]

Post by Paul H. Tarver
So, Dave's Office365 test for text & html submissions is working perfectly!
And, Ed's unscheduled test for the hold procedure for non-subscribers is
working perfectly!
ALL TESTS SUCCESSFUL! ALL SYSTEMS GO!

I'm getting tired of winning.
--
Ted Roche
Ted Roche & Associates, LLC
http://www.tedroche.com

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CACW6n4uqRJ=iyhetg4Dbvsch1HrPmWb16k+***@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Philip Borkholder]

Hi folks,

I'm in a difficult situation. I have a new customer who has a VFP app
that she designed and owns. She then has customers where this was installed.
Her previous programmer had provided her with "source code" so she
thought it would be no problem hiring me to take over since the previous
developer no longer has time to commit to the ongoing development of
this software.

I reviewed the "source code" she had to start quote her how much newer
changes might cost.
In my review of the software, I noticed it is missing:
1) VFP Project Files
2) Menu files (Mnx,Mnt). mpx is there.
3) Some graphic files used.
4) Who knows how many other files are missing? Without the original
Project Files, I can't tell what else was used in the project.

When she asked her previous programmer for these missing files, she was
told they are probably on an old server that he would have to restart
and try to retrieve files from it. He said it would probably be easier
just having the new developer (me) decompile the EXE to get the source code.

Question for you: Does ReFox uncompile an EXE into the actual MNX/MNT
and Project Files? I'm thinking no. Probably just the MPR, VCX/T, PRG, etc.
Also, I remember from long ago that ReFox would not de-compile any
programming notes from the previous PRGs etc.

My thought is the previous developer should've provided this to my
client since she designed and owns the software.
And now, since it is not all there, he should provide it to her.
Instead, he wants to charge a hefty bill to start up his old server to
retrieve what might be on there and no guarantee that it will all be there.

Thanks for any thoughts,

Philip B
Vicksburg, MI
____________________________________________________________
Melissa McCarthy Confirms Unfortunate News
track.volutrk.com
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/5b6490fa2747f10ef4a37st02duc

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/92ada0bf-a70b-a36d-752d-***@netzero.net
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Ted Roche]

Post by Philip Borkholder
I'm in a difficult situation.

I'd say your client is in a difficult situation.

A VERY CHEAP solution I've used in the past is to have the client
speak to their lawyer (or hire one, they're less expensive than you
might think) and have the lawyer write a VERY STERN LETTER to the old
programmer informing them on the serious consequences of not providing
their former customer with their promised source code in a a
workmanlike manner.

At no charge.

Promptly.

In a surprising number of cases, that's enough to resolve the issue.

(I have actually called a similar target and asked whether they wanted
the papers served to them or if they could provide me with their
attorney's contact info, and they folded on the spot, so...)
--
Ted Roche
Ted Roche & Associates, LLC
http://www.tedroche.com

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CACW6n4tip+***@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Philip Borkholder]

Thanks Ted,

I'll pass this recommendation on.

If worst comes to worst, do you have any experience with ReFox? Will it
decompile MNX/MNT files?

She's thinking about purchasing ReFox if need be.

Philip

Post by Ted Roche

Post by Philip Borkholder
I'm in a difficult situation.

I'd say your client is in a difficult situation.
A VERY CHEAP solution I've used in the past is to have the client
speak to their lawyer (or hire one, they're less expensive than you
might think) and have the lawyer write a VERY STERN LETTER to the old
programmer informing them on the serious consequences of not providing
their former customer with their promised source code in a a
workmanlike manner.
At no charge.
Promptly.
In a surprising number of cases, that's enough to resolve the issue.
(I have actually called a similar target and asked whether they wanted
the papers served to them or if they could provide me with their
attorney's contact info, and they folded on the spot, so...)

____________________________________________________________
Drink This Before Bed, Watch Your Body Fat Melt Like Crazy
Celebrity Local
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/5b64a47bf266b24711721st01vuc

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/b82c5d41-2d13-6487-1e30-***@netzero.net
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Vinny Terrabella]

Today's test message is brought to you by Sesame Street, and the letter
'D'. D for DOH! and D for DUH! and D for Dumb.... for words we can't
say on Sesame Street.

Test


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/dd0650da-37d6-29b8-bf34-***@caracal.net
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Ed Leafe]

Today's test message is brought to you by Sesame Street, and the letter 'D'. D for DOH! and D for DUH! and D for Dumb.... for words we can't say on Sesame Street.

It looks as though you have Defeated you Demons!

-- Ed Leafe






_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/204DA676-E70E-40D9-933A-***@leafe.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Ted Roche]

Dude, you have Dominated the Domain!

Post by Ed Leafe

Today's test message is brought to you by Sesame Street, and the letter 'D'. D for DOH! and D for DUH! and D for Dumb.... for words we can't say on Sesame Street.

It looks as though you have Defeated you Demons!
-- Ed Leafe

[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CACW6n4vcU_DyJL7jGc93LtypvxJexW8kDuY4C1EbdhZf2w+***@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Man-wai Chang]

D for Date()!

Today's test message is brought to you by Sesame Street, and the letter 'D'.
D for DOH! and D for DUH! and D for Dumb.... for words we can't say on
Sesame Street.
Test

--
.~. Might, Courage, Vision. SINCERITY!
/ v \ 64-bit Fedora 25 Server Spin
/( _ )\ http://sites.google.com/site/changmw
^ ^ May the Force and farces be with you!

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAGv=MJD7r_cFChVda6=k0d1JjUPfYaaySuGf5R8pOpS2-***@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[roger tremblay]

I totally agree with the attorney route.  Often times it is just like
Ted said,  one letter usually does the trick.

Post by Philip Borkholder
Thanks Ted,
I'll pass this recommendation on.
If worst comes to worst, do you have any experience with ReFox? Will
it decompile MNX/MNT files?
She's thinking about purchasing ReFox if need be.
Philip

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 1:29 PM, Philip Borkholder

Post by Philip Borkholder
I'm in a difficult situation.

I'd say your client is in a difficult situation.
A VERY CHEAP solution I've used in the past is to have the client
speak to their lawyer (or hire one, they're less expensive than you
might think) and have the lawyer write a VERY STERN LETTER to the old
programmer informing them on the serious consequences of not providing
their former customer with their promised source code in a a
workmanlike manner.
At no charge.
Promptly.
In a surprising number of cases, that's enough to resolve the issue.
(I have actually called a similar target and asked whether they wanted
the papers served to them or if they could provide me with their
attorney's contact info, and they folded on the spot, so...)

____________________________________________________________
Drink This Before Bed, Watch Your Body Fat Melt Like Crazy
Celebrity Local
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/5b64a47bf266b24711721st01vuc

[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/2b97a773-e175-a981-089a-***@gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too s

[Eric Selje]

Yes, as long as the original developer didn't do anything special ReFox
will reconstruct the MNX/MNT file.

BTW ReFox is a sponsor at Southwest Fox this year - thanks ReFox!

Eric

I totally agree with the attorney route. Often times it is just like Ted
said, one letter usually does the trick.

Post by Philip Borkholder
Thanks Ted,
I'll pass this recommendation on.
If worst comes to worst, do you have any experience with ReFox? Will it
decompile MNX/MNT files?
She's thinking about purchasing ReFox if need be.
Philip

Post by Ted Roche

Post by Philip Borkholder
I'm in a difficult situation.

I'd say your client is in a difficult situation.
A VERY CHEAP solution I've used in the past is to have the client
speak to their lawyer (or hire one, they're less expensive than you
might think) and have the lawyer write a VERY STERN LETTER to the old
programmer informing them on the serious consequences of not providing
their former customer with their promised source code in a a
workmanlike manner.
At no charge.
Promptly.
In a surprising number of cases, that's enough to resolve the issue.
(I have actually called a similar target and asked whether they wanted
the papers served to them or if they could provide me with their
attorney's contact info, and they folded on the spot, so...)

____________________________________________________________
Drink This Before Bed, Watch Your Body Fat Melt Like Crazy
Celebrity Local
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/5b64a47bf266b24711721st01vuc

[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAAwxvU=DXx3HVuDA3p2Tu6cr1wJ1py-***@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Philip Borkholder]

Thanks Eric,

See you at SW Fox!

-Philip

Post by Eric Selje
Yes, as long as the original developer didn't do anything special ReFox
will reconstruct the MNX/MNT file.
BTW ReFox is a sponsor at Southwest Fox this year - thanks ReFox!
Eric

I totally agree with the attorney route. Often times it is just like Ted
said, one letter usually does the trick.

Post by Philip Borkholder
Thanks Ted,
I'll pass this recommendation on.
If worst comes to worst, do you have any experience with ReFox? Will it
decompile MNX/MNT files?
She's thinking about purchasing ReFox if need be.
Philip

Post by Ted Roche

Post by Philip Borkholder
I'm in a difficult situation.

I'd say your client is in a difficult situation.
A VERY CHEAP solution I've used in the past is to have the client
speak to their lawyer (or hire one, they're less expensive than you
might think) and have the lawyer write a VERY STERN LETTER to the old
programmer informing them on the serious consequences of not providing
their former customer with their promised source code in a a
workmanlike manner.
At no charge.
Promptly.
In a surprising number of cases, that's enough to resolve the issue.
(I have actually called a similar target and asked whether they wanted
the papers served to them or if they could provide me with their
attorney's contact info, and they folded on the spot, so...)

____________________________________________________________
Drink This Before Bed, Watch Your Body Fat Melt Like Crazy
Celebrity Local
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/5b64a47bf266b24711721st01vuc

[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/8e4d3a14-cd43-56a1-54df-***@netzero.net
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Vince Teachout]

Today's test message is brought to you by Sesame Street, and the letter
'D'. D for DOH! and D for DUH! and D for Dumb.... for words we can't
say on Sesame Street.

Test
--
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/a64cf9a3-9301-b036-262e-***@caracal.net
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Fernando D. Bozzo]

I'm with TED on this one.

One extra problem trying to decompile the EXE --iin the best case-- is that
you always loose the .H files, the formatting and the comments, that
sometimes are the ONLY documentation for the system.
...if they didn't use Control Source Software, then probably do not have
any docs either, so the code comments can be important too.

Regards.-

Post by Philip Borkholder
Hi folks,
I'm in a difficult situation. I have a new customer who has a VFP app that
she designed and owns. She then has customers where this was installed.
Her previous programmer had provided her with "source code" so she thought
it would be no problem hiring me to take over since the previous developer
no longer has time to commit to the ongoing development of this software.
I reviewed the "source code" she had to start quote her how much newer
changes might cost.
1) VFP Project Files
2) Menu files (Mnx,Mnt). mpx is there.
3) Some graphic files used.
4) Who knows how many other files are missing? Without the original
Project Files, I can't tell what else was used in the project.
When she asked her previous programmer for these missing files, she was
told they are probably on an old server that he would have to restart and
try to retrieve files from it. He said it would probably be easier just
having the new developer (me) decompile the EXE to get the source code.
Question for you: Does ReFox uncompile an EXE into the actual MNX/MNT and
Project Files? I'm thinking no. Probably just the MPR, VCX/T, PRG, etc.
Also, I remember from long ago that ReFox would not de-compile any
programming notes from the previous PRGs etc.
My thought is the previous developer should've provided this to my client
since she designed and owns the software.
And now, since it is not all there, he should provide it to her. Instead,
he wants to charge a hefty bill to start up his old server to retrieve what
might be on there and no guarantee that it will all be there.
Thanks for any thoughts,
Philip B
Vicksburg, MI
____________________________________________________________
Melissa McCarthy Confirms Unfortunate News
track.volutrk.com
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/5b6490fa2747f10ef4a37st02duc

[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAGQ_JunA+G-***@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Gene Wirchenko]

Post by Ted Roche

Post by Paul H. Tarver
So, Dave's Office365 test for text & html submissions is working perfectly!
And, Ed's unscheduled test for the hold procedure for non-subscribers is
working perfectly!
ALL TESTS SUCCESSFUL! ALL SYSTEMS GO!

I'm getting tired of winning.

OK, I can help you: hand over the wallet. And be quick about
it. The weekend is coming up.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko


_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/***@mtlp000085
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Dave Crozier]

The reason from our end is that I was subscribed using the ***@flexipol.co.uk alias on our exchange server but with 365 you cannot send as an alias you can only receive via your primary email address which is ***@flexipol.co.uk so I had to re-subscribe under my primary email. Hence the end of month stats show two Dave Crozier's ... (god forbid!!)

Dave Crozier
Software Development Manager
Flexipol Packaging Ltd.

-----Original Message-----
From: ProFox <profox-***@leafe.com> On Behalf Of Gene Wirchenko
Sent: 03 August 2018 18:38
To: ProFox Email List <***@leafe.com>
Subject: Re: Test Email

Post by Ted Roche

Post by Paul H. Tarver
So, Dave's Office365 test for text & html submissions is working perfectly!
And, Ed's unscheduled test for the hold procedure for
non-subscribers is working perfectly!
ALL TESTS SUCCESSFUL! ALL SYSTEMS GO!

I'm getting tired of winning.

OK, I can help you: hand over the wallet. And be quick about it. The weekend is coming up.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko


[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/***@MM1P123MB0953.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Vince Teachout]

Post by Ed Leafe
It was held because apparently you were not a subscriber for a period, and posts from non-subscribers are held until I get around to reviewing them.

Yeah, about that. Ever since I switched mailboxes for Profox, I've been
a non-subscriber, and have to wait for you to vet my brilliant,
sometimes heart-breakingly beautiful replies.

What did I screw up, and how do I fix it?

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1b160848-f4eb-af1b-c4e1-***@taconic.net
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Dave Crozier]

Re-register!!!

Dave Crozier
Software Development Manager
Flexipol Packaging Ltd.

-----Original Message-----
From: ProFox <profox-***@leafe.com> On Behalf Of Vince Teachout
Sent: 03 August 2018 16:40
To: ProFox Email List <***@leafe.com>; Ed Leafe <***@leafe.com>
Subject: Re: Test Email

Post by Ed Leafe
It was held because apparently you were not a subscriber for a period, and posts from non-subscribers are held until I get around to reviewing them.

Yeah, about that. Ever since I switched mailboxes for Profox, I've been a non-subscriber, and have to wait for you to vet my brilliant, sometimes heart-breakingly beautiful replies.

What did I screw up, and how do I fix it?

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/***@MM1P123MB0953.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Vince Teachout]

Post by Dave Crozier
Re-register!!!

No, the problem turned out to be a code ID-10T: PEBCAK.  :-)


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/6b397e13-fa22-fe98-46b6-***@caracal.net
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obviou

[Koen Piller]

test passed

Post by Ed Leafe

Post by Ed Leafe
It was held because apparently you were not a subscriber for a period,

and posts from non-subscribers are held until I get around to reviewing
them.
Yeah, about that. Ever since I switched mailboxes for Profox, I've been
a non-subscriber, and have to wait for you to vet my brilliant,
sometimes heart-breakingly beautiful replies.
What did I screw up, and how do I fix it?
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CACUu1SugLiiynU8Y4igkH4=m66kqKf_-HsFJCt=1jdHyNe3-***@mail.gmail.com
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

[Gene Wirchenko]

Post by Vince Teachout

Post by Ed Leafe
It was held because apparently you were not a subscriber for a
period, and posts from non-subscribers are held until I get around
to reviewing them.

Yeah, about that. Ever since I switched mailboxes for Profox, I've
been a non-subscriber, and have to wait for you to vet my brilliant,
sometimes heart-breakingly beautiful replies.

Excellent writing, excellent writing. It is poignant and to the point.

Although "ProFox" is misspelled.

Post by Vince Teachout
What did I screw up, and how do I fix it?

What is this pedestrian, vulgar language? Ed, do not approve
this post of Mr. Teachout's.


Yeah, sometimes, my posts do not make it for reasons I know not, too.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko


_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ***@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/***@mtlp000086
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.