Conference 7.286::digital

	But I'm not stuck with ALL-IN-1. DECmail-11 (nie DECmail/RSTS)
	which I continue to use has always (in my memory) allowed the
	deletion of unread mail. I think VMS MAIL does to but I'm not
	sure if it always did. There is no policy that I know of that
	forbids it's use.

	My guess is that it's an ALL-IN-1 bug or design flaw that no one
	wants to fix.

			Alfred

    No, there's no "bug or design flaw" in ALL-IN-1.  The fourth screen
    of the ALL-IN-1 profiles says:
    
    	"Delete unread mail" (y/n)
    
    and a simple response of "Y" will allow the user to deleted unread
    INBOX messages....I had that feature enabled on one of my all in
    one accounts, and, thought there would be no trouble having it enabled
    here, but, alas ... "against corporate policy".
    
    Jerry

	... I just deleted an INBOX message without READing it, emptied the
WASTEBASKET, and got nary a squawk from ALL-IN-1.  I would bet you could do the
same in V2.0, V2.1, V2.2.  If the SUBJECT field is informative enough, this is
certainly time-saving, but how often is that true?  Now, my message was not
READ-RECEIPTed, so I don't know if ALL-IN-1 might catch that, but I doubt it.

	BTW, V2.3 makes this type of operation much more user-friendly than 
previous versions!  New INDEX functionality.

	As for the "policy", I think someone is "wolfin'" you!  Does DIS run
your shop?  They let us do it in the Southern Area.

    I, too, can delete inbox messages.  Maybe it is just a local thing....
    
    (BTW, I think they put in the MDI option--Multiple Delete Inbox--
    because people were getting "junk" mail and complained about it).
    
    kim

    Write to the distribution list holder and get your name removed?

    In EHQ here in Geneva, we've had this ability for several months.
     There certainly is NOT any _corporate_ policy on this !

        Our cluster is running the internally supported (DIS/MTS) version
        of ALL-IN-1 V2.3.  It will not allow me to delete an unread MAIL
        message.  It would not be incredibly difficult for me to write an
        ALL-IN-1 script to mark all the messages in my INBOX folder as
        "READ", in which case I suspect the script that's refusing to let
        me delete unread messages would be fooled. 
        
        It's possible that people whose systems allow them to delete the
        unread messages are running "vanilla" ALL-IN-1 (out of the box, so
        to speak), or are running a locally customized version.  One of
        the really nice things about ALL-IN-1 is that it can be easily
        customized to meet local requirements.  One of the real nuisances
        about the way we use and support ALL-IN-1 internally is that many
        internal MIS groups have an attitude problem about customizing
        ALL-IN-1 in response to local users' perceived needs. 
        
        Whether there is or isn't a corporate policy is probably relevant
        only to those who believe that the presence or absence of such a
        policy matters.  If your local MIS/DIS/ALL-IN-1 support group has
        installed a "delete" script that won't let you delete unread
        messages, and you want them to change it, then you need to provide
        a business justification.  The alternative is to learn enough
        about ALL-IN-1 to "repair" the "delete" script to let you do what
        you want as a personal option.  Of course, your local MIS group
        can install ALL-IN-1 in ways that prevent you from doing this. 
        
        Tom

    
    
     I don't think it is an "attitude" problem in so much as a management
    problem. Overhead functions/organizations lack both the people and
    the resources needed to do the job. Now depending on what resources
    are delegated where... attitudes might come into play. Proper
    resource management is the key. This plays true in all organizations
    of DEC these days, doesn't it?
    
    -Mike Z.

    Re "resources", it is a neglible resource to setup the system to allow
    users to delete their unread mail.  And enabling such an option where
    "junk mail" is really a problem would seem to *improve* the resources
    of the users who have to read thru at least the first screen of such
    junk before they can delete it.
    
    So who's resources are being saved by paranoid system managers??
    
    Jon

Not to mention which, if it is, in fact, a resource problem, whoever said
it was "corporate policy" is going to end up looking like a damn fool.

Reminds me of two of the most intelligent statements I've ever heard in my
life, and which I hear all too little of in DEC these days.
One is, "I made a mistake", and the other is "I don't know". Why is it that
people feel they have to give out bulls_it answers instead of admitting to
one of the above?

-Jack

        Re: .10

> Reminds me of two of the most intelligent statements I've ever heard in my
> life, and which I hear all too little of in DEC these days.
> One is, "I made a mistake", and the other is "I don't know". Why is it that
> people feel they have to give out bulls_it answers instead of admitting to
> one of the above?
        
        I don't know.  B.J.

    I once said "I don't know", but it turned out I made a mistake.
    
    		Steve

941.7> It would not be incredibly difficult for me to write an
941.7> ALL-IN-1 script to mark all the messages in my INBOX folder as
941.7> "READ", in which case I suspect the script that's refusing to let
941.7> me delete unread messages would be fooled. 
       
    If *anyone* has such a script, would they *please* send it to me
    and tell me how to use it?  PLEASE.
    
941.8>  I don't think it is an "attitude" problem in so much as a management
941.8>  problem. Overhead functions/organizations lack both the people and
941.8>  the resources needed to do the job.
    
    Under 2.3, the 4th screen of the ALL-IN-1 profile says:
    
    		"Delete unread mail (Y/N)?"
    
    To the best of my minimal knowledge of VMS/ALL-IN-1 I really don't
    see that an enormous amount of resources would be necessary to handle
    this.  Perhaps I'm wrong.
    
941.10> Not to mention which, if it is, in fact, a resource problem,
941.10> whoever said it was "corporate policy" is going to end up
941.10> looking like a damn fool.

    Which is precisely the reason why I've stopped getting a response
    from the HELP function.  I've responded with three extremely polite,
    professionally worded mail messages asking them to point me to the
    corporate policy whicy prohibits deletion of unread mail.  I have
    yet to get a single response.
    
    Therefore, does anyone know the "chain of command" responsible for
    DIS in the Marlboro, MA area?  Time to go up the food chain.
    
    Thanks for the responses, I wanted to make sure that I wasn't going
    off the deep end before I started going up the chain.
    
    Jerry Beeler

    Re sending you an ALL-IN-1 script to make this happen, I would not
    recommend that option.  If at all possible, it is usually better to
    work out this difference of opinion with the paranoia that manages it,
    rather than try to work around it.  Since you've made your plight known
    via this conference, there's a good chance that the local system folks
    will be "watching" your account to see if you are going to try to
    circumvent their perceived authority.
    
    Presumably you're not the *only* one in your office that receives
    extraordinary amounts of junk mail?  Perhaps a first step would be to
    get other people together who also perceive this restriction as a
    problem, and work as a team to resolve it.  By far the most effective
    way to handle the problem is to enable the option that ALL-IN-1 already
    gives you to resolve this problem.  And if you make it known that it is
    not only you but many other people as well who object to this
    [unreasonable, IMHO] restriction, I would think your chance would be
    much better to get it resolved.
    
    You might want to find the DIZ ... oops, DIS management chain in your
    own area to start your climb, as I'm not sure that it is even a
    consistent policy within the DIZ ... oops, DIS organization to prevent
    the deletion of unread mail.
    
    Good luck
    Jon

    
     Jerry,
    
       If you are on a DIS machine running the toolkit (v2.4) I believe
    the option you seek should be under the File Cabinet (FC) as Multiple
    Delete of Inbox (MDI). I thought *ALL* DIS machines were to conform
    to having the SAME software running in particular environments.
    I could be mistaken though. So give MDI a try. You should be able
    to call it up from most any menu. The next version of ALL-IN-1 gives
    you this functionality, so someone saying corporate policy maybe
    missing something...
    
    Good Luck!
    Mike Z.

    While I do not have ALL-IN-1, I do get lots of FYI and
    distribution list mail. I solve the problem by using the tool
    Amail from the toolshed to sort my new VMS mail before I arrive
    in the morning. Research by Tom Malone and the Information Lens
    project at MIT have shown the most common mail message selection
    filter was "My name is not in the TO or CC list." Mail filtering
    a hot topic and I am amazed that someone is trying to force you
    read your mail. As if they knew what messages were important to
    your getting your job done.

    It is interesting to see the reaction to this policy. One of the
    requests I hear from various people is for mail read receipt,
    that is the sender is notified when you read their message. They
    usually want a switch to turn off the feature when I suggest
    that I get a read receipt when they read messages from me.
    
    mike

    
    Select Inbox
    RFF (Refile Folder) to Wastebasket
    EW (Empty Wastebasket)
    
    This is what I used under the old ALL-IN-1 system, but then again
    I'm not a fan of DIS, so I usually just autoforward to VMSmail
    nowadays...
    
    -Jp