 sj |
||
|
||
Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages
|
|
|
Subject: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Jim Martin Date: 21 May 05 - 10:22 AM Does anyone know why when I attempt to email "Mudcat" messages as an attachment, I am told the page doesn't exist and yet at other times there is no problem at all? This also happens with other websites. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Clinton Hammond Date: 21 May 05 - 10:27 AM You'll have to explain exactly HOW it is you're attempting to email "mudcat messages"... Start with what browser/emailer program you're using... then explain, step by step what it is you do to send a 'mudcat message'... Then MAYBE someone can try to help you :-) |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: mack/misophist Date: 21 May 05 - 10:31 AM Why not just copy and paste? |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Clinton Hammond Date: 21 May 05 - 10:33 AM Cause that's not what was asked after Mack... If someone asks you how to bake a cake, would you suggest they make cookies instead? |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Jim Martin Date: 21 May 05 - 10:43 AM Sorry, I'm not very good at explaining these things. I'm using IE and click on the "mail" option at the top of the screen and just follow the instructions, that's about the best I can explain it. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: JohnInKansas Date: 21 May 05 - 11:43 AM A typical IE toolbar has a little "envelope" picture, usually next to the "print" icon and on the same section of the bar as the "Word" icon. You can also click on the "File" and hover on "Send" to select send page, send link, or put a shortcut to the page on your desktop. A third entry to the same functions is on "Tools" "Mail and News" where you can select "send a link" or "send page." A suspected/possible reason why sending a page might fail is simple file size. This thread, prior to this post with only four posts, receives as a 37 KB email. Most threads aren't going to be large enough to cause a problem, but 50 short posts like those here would be close to 1 MB, and a thread with longer and/or more posts could easily reach the 2 MB limit imposed by many email services. Smaller individual messages could also fail delivery if the recipient has a "stuffed full" mailbox and there isn't room to receive a new one of the size you send. We have several contacts who have to be telephoned to remind them to empty their in-box almost every time we send them an email with more than a few words. One simple way to check out what's happening would perhaps be to put yourself on as a CC: or BCC: recipient, so you'll know whether the problem is with the sending or the getting of the message(?) A second possibility, if you're not putting a clear "sent by" ident and an appropriate subject on the message is that some of the messages are going into junk mail at the addressees' end. The default subject line, for a mudcat thread, is just "Emailing: thread.htm" which really looks sort of like junk. John |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Bill D Date: 21 May 05 - 11:50 AM umm...where are you getting the "Mudcat messages"? (That is what sort of stuff do you CALL a Mudcat message?)Who do you want to send them to? Other Mudcatters? Have you used email before to send OTHER messages? We have a private message system for registered Mudcat members...which you are. That little blue "PM" thing beside names will get you to that feature. Email is not 'usually' the way Mudcatters send each other messages, unless they give out their email addresses. You need to describe, without naming names or details, what you want to do. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Clinton Hammond Date: 21 May 05 - 12:01 PM It's pretty obvious that what HH is trying to do is forward whole or part threads as email atachments... And as suggested above, thread size MIGHT be an issue... It would be much easier to simply copy and paste the url (The HTTP://blablahblah bit) into the 'body' of the email.. that way you send a LINK to the information without actually sending a copy of the whole thread... One assumes you know how to copy & paste HH? If not I'm sure someone here will be happy to spell it out for ya! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: GUEST,Jon Date: 21 May 05 - 12:19 PM I can't see those figures John. I've just saved the 124 post BMP thread to disk here as a sample and that is only 224Kb. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Rasener Date: 21 May 05 - 12:20 PM Thats exactly what I do Clinton. I right click on the Address bar and select copy. I then go to my e-mail message and paste the link. I then send it to whoever I want. Its then up to the recipient to to go to the thread. A very good way of getting non mudcatters to join, me thinks. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: GUEST,Jon Date: 21 May 05 - 12:27 PM Just tried the same BNP thread as an OE email. It comes to 393K |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Bill D Date: 21 May 05 - 12:57 PM I am not convinced that is what Hen is trying to do. If he just wants to send some text by email, that is one thing...if he is trying to contact someone IN Mudcat, that is another....if he is trying to send the address OF a message, it is still another. HE need to spell out his goal. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Clinton Hammond Date: 21 May 05 - 01:04 PM "when I attempt to email "Mudcat" messages as an attachment" That says sending threads to people via email, but ya... we'll have to wait and see if HH comes back to answer our questions... |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: JohnInKansas Date: 21 May 05 - 02:25 PM In IE, if you click on the "Mail" icon on the toolbar - a little envelope with the flap open - you can choose "Send a Link" or "Send Page." If you select "Send Page," the web page you are viewing is inserted as body text into a new email message. The message received, at least in OE, looks very much like just looking at a mudcat thread. This thread, through Clinton's post at 01:04 PM, is received in OE as a 58 KB email. There's a bit of "overhead" in the page, so the size isn't strictly proportional to the number of text characters, but is roughly so. The size of the email received is NOT necessarily the same as the size of a "saved page" if you use some method other than sending the page as an email to yourself. If you select the "Send a Link" option on the mail button in IE, the link appears as an attachment. The attachment itself, in this case, is about 85 bytes, and would be about the same size for a link to any thread at mudcat. The email containing the link as an attachment shows, again in OE, as about a 3 KB message, if you leave the default text in the body of the message. Many email filters (spam filters, mostly) automatically reject email with attachments, unless you've specifically declared the sender to be a "trusted source." Some email filters pretty generally reject email containing links, again unless you've specifically declared the sender to be a "trusted source." Some email programs and/or email services, by default, prevent sending email containing links unless you make appropriate changes to your email settings. A link as an attachment should be doubly suspect, although I don't know what rules generally are used by common filters. The "threat potential" comes from there being no simple way to see what the link is except by opening it, so if you click the attachment you execute any connection the link wants to send you to. "Faking," where the link looks like it will send you to a good place but actually sends you to a malware site is very common in spam, and some filters may reject mail on this basis. If you "Send a Link" OE inserts the default text in the body of the email: "The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments: Shortcut to: http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=81389&messages=13 "Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled." You may get a different default text, or none, with other email programs. With respect to file size - many email providers limit the size of single messages you can send and/or receive. Usual limits on individual messages are 1 or 2 MB, although premium services may allow much larger messages. Many providers also limit the total amount of stuff you can have in your in box or on the server. It is not necessary, in the latter case, that your message be particularly large if it brings the total of all messages in the recipient's inbox to more than the provider allows -- the message will be rejected. As noted above, a couple of dear (cheap) friends often bounce 20 KB messages because their boxes are full. The simplest way to look at what's happening, when there's an email problem is to send a message to yourself and see if it gets through. If you're having problems sending to a particular recipient, adding yourself as a CC: or BCC: to the message will tell you whether the problem is yours or the recipient's. If you get the CC:, then the mail was sent and was blocked or fumbled at the recipient's end. Some, but not all, email providers routinely send a "non-delivery" notice if a message is not delivered. Rarely, these may give some indication of what went wrong; but usually they're just a notice that the message didn't go through. As an incidental note, the same IE mail utility can be used to send individual images from a web page. You can put "email" in the search line in IE Help to see other things you can do. John |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Uncle_DaveO Date: 21 May 05 - 03:58 PM It should be remembered, I think, that every post on Mudcat automatically has copyright protection. Accordingly, one shouldn't be sending the content elsewhere. A URL, so that the recipient can come here to read it, is a different thing. Dave Oesterreich |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Clinton Hammond Date: 21 May 05 - 04:04 PM "every post on Mudcat automatically has copyright protection" Ballsack... and even if they do, it's unenforceable... |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Jim Martin Date: 21 May 05 - 04:36 PM Sorry about the delay in responding, just had to pop out for a walk along our lovely coastline (West County Clare in Eire), lovely late Spring evening - to regain my sanity! I email non "Mudcatters". I'm afraid your other questions are a bit beyond my limited IT intellect! |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Clinton Hammond Date: 21 May 05 - 05:33 PM So it's the people who receive your emails that get the "page doesn't exist" error message? The might have more to do with Mudcats spotty connectivity... If they try the same thing later is the page found? Otherwise, the information, and alternative suggestions in this thread are about as concise and simple as they can be without becoming needlessly repetitive.. Perhaps try some of the suggestions, that they might fix your sporadic issues Good luck! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Joe Offer Date: 21 May 05 - 05:55 PM I would suggest that copy-paste is the best way to e-mail information you've found on Mudcat, and probably the best way to send information you've found anywhere on the Web. If you try to send an entire Web page, you end up sending all sorts of stuff the receiver doesn't need, and it comes from a number of different sources. If you want to send a complete page or a complete message, you'd be better off to send in our "printer friendly" format. There's a "printer friendly" link at the bottom of each Forum message - and one at the tope of each thread if you want to send or print an entire thread. you'll find the "printer-friendly" pages are much easier to send. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: George Seto - af221@chebucto.ns.ca Date: 21 May 05 - 06:33 PM I send the entire Thread to myself (or anyone else for that matter) quite often. It's easier than you people who use graphic browsers can even imagine. I just press P and it says, That's the luxury of Text Browsing with Lynx. If I had to do it with Netscape or IE, I would do as Joe just suggested, go to the Printer-friendly section and cut out what is needed, and send that specific portion. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 21 May 05 - 07:15 PM I usually save the threads I post to, in HTML format only, on my HD. When I had only a set of 1 & 2 Gb HDs, I used to have to go and compress the messages, pulling out several KB each thread of excess blank lines (which HTML ignores) that are automatically generated. But now with my much larger HDs on my new machine - wait on, what was that message - Oh, I'm running out of disk space - be back later.... |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Joe Offer Date: 21 May 05 - 09:24 PM Foolestroupe, you'd probably benefit from saving in "printer-friendly" format, too. -Joe offer- |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 22 May 05 - 12:48 AM Well, if I was just going to print them out - but that 'Printer Friendly' thing strips out all the URLs..... 'URL Unfriendly?' [;P |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: JohnInKansas Date: 22 May 05 - 03:27 PM There are numerous different ways to save things, and there are advantages and disadvantages to each of them. Save as html: When you save as html, you get a file and a "same-named" folder with any bits of stuff linked internally to the file. This thread, as an example, saved a couple of posts ago as a 55 KB file and a folder containing 3 smaller files, 2, 2, and 10 KB. Total size of the four files was 76.2 KB, but since there are 4 separate files involved, each potentially with an average 1 KB "cluster loss" they may have used anything from 78 KB to 92 KB on the disk. You can move "saved pages" around for sorting and classifying if you keep the file and its associated folder together. You cannot change the name of either of them, except by opening them in your browser and doing a "save as" with the new name, then going back and deleting the old ones. Send as email: The same version of this thread sent to my self came back as an 86 KB email message. In Outlook Express it looks exactly like the original page. Since email is automatically in a database format, there is no significant "cluster loss," making this a fairly compact method of saving. The main problem with saving in your email folder(s) is that you can only backup and recover entire email folders. If you back up, and don't delete, a restore of the backup gives you two copies of everything. Some email providers also have low limits on how much you can leave on the site, as well, and to get the email into a local folder on your own machine takes some juggling. Save as individual eml files: Not all email programs permit it, but OE lets you save an individual email message as an "email file," (.eml). The above 86 KB message saved as 87 KB in a separate .eml. An individual message should open in OE so it looks just like a new message, complete with all links and attachments. The .eml files produced by OE apparently only open in OE, but once open they can be "moved to" a folder in your regular email setup for reading in another email program or in your web browser. Copy and paste into your word processor: A straight copy and paste into a Word document produced a 182 KB .doc file. Links are preserved, but it's pretty messy. Pasted into a Word document as formatted text gives a 201 KB .doc file, but preserves links (and the same other messy stuff). Surprisingly perhaps, saving the "formatted paste" as a formatted text (.rtf) file gets you 291 KB, 50% larger than the Word file. The above version of this page pasted into a Word document as unformatted text produced a 55 KB .doc file. Text pastes cleanly and compactly, and most of the mess is eliminated. Saving the "paste-unformatted" as a plain text (.txt) file reduces the size to 20 KB. Links, of course, are not preserved in unformatted plain text. For the most compact save of the text on a page, copy and paste as unformatted text into Notepad or Word, and save as .txt. If there are a few links you want to save, you can right click them and "copy shortcut," then paste the shortcut (url) into the .txt document. If you want the "whole thing" as the web page, or want to save a lot of links with the page, either a save as html or sending yourself an email of the page should work well, depending on whether you'd rather work html file/folder pairs or work with email messages. The impact on the web site should not be significantly different for either of these two methods, since once it's "loaded" it's on your machine and doesn't require site action. (Note that on complex web pages, some links may be preserved but won't work, since they may point to local pages that have to be executed from the actual web site/page. That's not usually a problem at the 'cat.) Emailing a link to a page should be a very efficient way of referring someone to a page, but the site must be up and the recipient must be able to connect to it when they click the link for it work. Because of the ease with which an "attachment link" can be faked for malicious purposes - and the frequency with which it's done - I probably wouldn't open the attachment. I'd much prefer to receive an email with the url copied from the address bar and pasted - in plain text - in the body of the message. I'd think a brief comment on what's there and why it was sent to me would be in order as well, as otherwise I'll delete without reading. John |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 22 May 05 - 08:47 PM JiK re your 'Save as html:' The folder (directory) has '-files' attached to the 'same name' of the HTML file. the HTML file is saved at the same level as the folder i.e. it is NOT inside the folder. you can move it there, but then it won't find any of the graphics, CSS files, etc. To then get the HTML page to work as per the original, you need to edit it to strip out all references to the folder name. Also, if you don't also remove any Javascript or some external URL references, you are likely to get 'run time errors' from MSIE. Robin |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: GUEST,.gargoyle Date: 22 May 05 - 08:54 PM Mr. Offer, as usual, is correct (conforming to my personal protocal) to advise CUT/PASTE
However, it is also best on "protected/gif-inserted/html-linked" pages to cut/paste FIRST into a plain-jane such as NOTEPAD.
You want to REMOVE - all IMBEDDED (hidden) hyperlinks.
You want pure TEXT and you want to remove the moving gifs etc.
For authenticity, valididation, you can also "save to file" the Logos, Banners, Headings, Dates peculiar to the particular article .... and insert them into the format of your e-mail as a "picture."
It sometimes takes A-LOT-OF-WORK on your part....to make the reading of an e-mail simple for the reciever.
Writers are paid, subscriptions sought, and most everyone is looking for a "buck" paid on placement and clicks.
IF the article is good enough....and your friends are worth the time .... cut/paste ........you already paid the dime simplifying communication on the i-net is not a crime.
Sincerely, |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Clinton Hammond Date: 22 May 05 - 09:25 PM "It sometimes takes A-LOT-OF-WORK ...to make the reading of an e-mail simple for the reciever." That's why it's easiest just to C&P the url... |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Jim Martin Date: 22 May 05 - 09:43 PM It's me who gets the "page doesn't exist" error message. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Clinton Hammond Date: 22 May 05 - 09:59 PM Explain, step by step the whole process would ya HH, with emphasis on exactly what you're doing when you get this error message... :-) |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Jim Martin Date: 22 May 05 - 10:30 PM I click on the "mail" toolbar button (IE), then "send page", then get "The page cannot be found" message (sometimes). |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Clinton Hammond Date: 22 May 05 - 10:41 PM You are most likely then a victim of grotty Mudcat connectivity... If you then cancel and try again what happens? |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: JohnInKansas Date: 22 May 05 - 10:49 PM Robin - That's what I said. In WinXP, you can theoretically set up Windows Explorer to "handle html as a single file." This only works if you use one of the funky "new" layouts, but if you set it up that way, Explorer supposedly will show you only the main page file, but if you copy/cut/paste/move it, it will take both the file and the same-named folder that goes with it, and "will always keep them together(?)." Or so they say.... John |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: GUEST,.gargoyle Date: 22 May 05 - 10:59 PM HH - cut/paste NOTEPAD
|
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: wysiwyg Date: 22 May 05 - 11:17 PM A Mudcat thread is not a page, it's a result of database cues to fetch info and display it. Mail the URL of the thread instead. ~S~ |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Jim Martin Date: 22 May 05 - 11:21 PM If I cancel and repeat attempt, sometimes I'm lucky, more often I'm not! Since I downloaded "Onspeed" software, the time taken to open webpages has been dramatically reduced (we aren't on broadband here in the deep outback of West Ireland, only wireless broadband, I can't afford that, it's very expensive. "Onspeed" is a good alternative for what I need a nd it's only €45 a year! http://www.onspeed.com |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: JohnInKansas Date: 22 May 05 - 11:32 PM Gargoyle - I'm probably less adventurous than you with my browsing, since I seldom visit sites with a lot of the Java/Flash etc junk - and even less often re-visit them or want to save anything from them. If I do save bits from a funky page, I usually paste as unformatted text directly into Word, since Word has powerful find/replace functions that notepad doesn't have. It's plain text either way, and all the garbage gets stripped out. HH - I'd agree with Clinton that you're probably hitting a glitch in your connection to mudcat. When you click on "send page as email" a fresh copy of the page is downloaded to your "email program," even if it's the same browser you're using to view the page. If the site was just "busy" and didn't respond, just trying again may work. You can also hit the "Refresh" button on the IE toolbar, and if you've lost the connection (or mudcat's gone to sleep) you'll get the same page not found or something similar. If the connection is lost you won't be able to send the page as email - I think. The solution is to try again later when mudcat is in better health (or better humor). John |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: GUEST,Jon Date: 23 May 05 - 03:09 AM As others have said, "page not found" is most likely to be a problem with Mudcat. Susan, a Mudcat thread is still a page, at least as far as that error is concerned. It's just a page with dynamic content. HH, I'd take onboard the comments about sending a link or plain text instead. Sending out masses of html (and possibly other junk) is not really a friendly thing to do. |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: The Fooles Troupe Date: 23 May 05 - 08:41 AM JiK I am still on Win98SE. Robin |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: JohnInKansas Date: 23 May 05 - 11:33 AM Robin - Even if you were on WinXP I would not seriously recommend the "new" layouts. Windows tells you enough lies without deliberately adding layers of automatic stuff that Mickey justifies by "it does it because it's good for you and you're too stupid to have a computer that you control." Gargoyle - I haven't investigate them all, but under "File | Save As" IE offers four different ways to save a web page: You can save "web page complete" which will give you a .htm file and a folder with the same name. The folder will contain locally linked bits and pieces called for in the .htm script. It should contain only the bits and pieces actually used by the page you save, so it shouldn't take any longer to download than opening the page in your browser. You can save as a "web archive," which is described as a "single file .hmt." I frankly don't know what this is - haven't tried it. You can save as "web page, HTML only" which again I haven't tried, but you'd assume it saves the .htm without the separate folder of insert bits. It may insert the bits directly into the file, or it may use placeholders. You can save as "text file, .txt," which gives essentially the same result as Copy and Paste into Notepad or Copy and Paste As Unformatted Text into Word (Edit|Paste Special|Unformatted Text). If you "copy" like I do, you probably omit selecting some of the header and footer stuff on a lot of pages, and the "Save As | Text File" will do a "Select All" to decide what to save, but there should be NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE between "Save As | Text File" and pasting into Notepad - for the same selection of what to save. You may, in fact, find it a little better, since it does pad some tabs and gives a fairly clean layout to work with. John |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: Clinton Hammond Date: 23 May 05 - 11:53 AM "It's just a page with dynamic content." And the over-statement of the year goes to... LOL |
|
Subject: RE: Tech: Emailing Mudcat Messages From: JohnInKansas Date: 23 May 05 - 12:18 PM HTMLspeak (coding): a "page" has a fairly specific definition, (or a few fairly specific definitions). Webspeak (viewing): a "page" is whatever downloads when you click a single link and is viewable until you execute a new link or jump to a new web address (url). We often don't announce which language we're speaking - or when we change to a new one. Jon was pretty broad-brush there, but he probably grinned secretely. John |
| Share Thread: |